A Simple Scale for Screening Lower-Extremity Arterial Disease as a Possible Cause of Low Back Pain: a Cross-sectional Study Among 542 Subjects.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Epidemiological, imaging, and anatomical studies suggest an association between proximal arterial atherosclerosis and development of low back pain (LBP).Objectives
We aimed to define (1) the frequency and (2) factors associated with exercise-induced proximal ischemia (EIPI) in individuals with LBP and (3) develop a clinical screening scale.Design
Monocentric cross-sectional study.Participants
All patients with history of ongoing LBP referred to our exercise investigation laboratory for exercise transcutaneous oximetry (ex-tcPO2) between January 2011 and December 2017 (n = 542; mean age, 65.4 ± 10.9; 83.9% men).Main measures
EIPI was defined as a decrease from rest of oxygen pressure (DROP) below - 15 mmHg on the lumbar and/or buttock probes. Ex-tcPO2 is a reliable validated tool for diagnosing EIPI in comparison with arteriography and computed tomography angiography. Ex-tcPO2 was performed on a treadmill until symptom manifestation or exhaustion. Clinical data were collected using interview questionnaires, medical file review, and clinical examination.Key results
EIPI was diagnosed in 282 patients (52%). Age ≤ 70 years (OR, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.35-3.57; p = 0.002), a history of proximal revascularization (OR, 2.64; 95% CI, 1.50-4.65; p = 0.001), use of antiplatelet medication (OR, 1.71; 95% CI, 0.96-3.06; p = 0.069), a relationship between exercise and LBP (OR, 2.61; 95% CI, 1.49-4.57; p = 0.001), and an abnormal ankle to brachial index (OR, 2.87; 95% CI, 1.77-4.66; p < 0.0001) were identified as EIPI predictors. Using these items, we developed a screening scale that showed an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of .756. At a score of ≥ 3, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for EIPI were 84%, 55%, and 71%, respectively.Conclusions
EIPI was common among our patients with LBP undergoing ex-TcPO2. Our screening scale could help better select the patients who require angiography.
SUBMITTER: Gahier M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7351938 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveLow back pain is one of the most common reasons for which people visit their doctor. Between 12% and 15% of the US population seek care for spine pain each year, with associated costs exceeding $200 billion. Up to 80% of adults will experience acute low back pain at some point in their lives. This staggering prevalence supports the need for increased research to support tailored clinical care of low back pain. This work proposes a multidimensional conceptual taxonomy.MethodsA multidisciplinary task force of the ACTTION-APS-AAPM Pain Taxonomy (AAAPT) with clinical and research expertise performed a focused review and analysis, applying the AAAPT five-dimensional framework to acute low back pain.ResultsApplication of the AAAPT framework yielded the following: 1) Core Criteria: location, timing, and severity of acute low back pain were defined; 2) Common Features: character and expected trajectories were established in relevant subgroups, and common pain assessment tools were identified; 3) Modulating Factors: biological, psychological, and social factors that modulate interindividual variability were delineated; 4) Impact/Functional Consequences: domains of impact were outlined and defined; 5) Neurobiological Mechanisms: putative mechanisms were specified including nerve injury, inflammation, peripheral and central sensitization, and affective and social processing of acute low back pain.ConclusionsThe goal of applying the AAAPT taxonomy to acute low back pain is to improve its assessment through a defined evidence and consensus-driven structure. The criteria proposed will enable more rigorous meta-analyses and promote more generalizable studies of interindividual variation in acute low back pain and its potential underlying mechanisms.
| S-EPMC8453619 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Low-back pain has a high impact on the world population, and solutions are in demand. The behavior of specific physiological processes has been modified using magnetic fields, whether for pain relief, bone consolidation, or improvement of vascularization. The use of tape with magnetic properties could help in these cases. A double-blind randomized clinical trial was designed to use Magnetic Tape® versus placebo Kinesio tape. Blood flow variables were evaluated using pulsed power Doppler ultrasound. Resistance index, pulsatility index, systolic velocity, and diastolic velocity were measured. The pressure pain threshold was measured using algometry in 22 subjects. The results reveal significant differences between the groups for the pulsation index variable (8.06 [5.16, 20.16] in Magnetic Tape® versus 5.50 [4.56, 6.64] in Kinesio tape) and lower (0.98 [0.92, 1.02] for Magnetic Tape® versus 0.99 [0.95, 1.01] for Kinesio tape) in the resistance index variable. The pressure pain threshold variable presented significant differences at multiple levels. The application of Magnetic Tape® causes immediate effects on blood flow and pain and could be a technique of choice for pain modulation. Further studies would be necessary.
| S-EPMC8512790 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceLow back pain (LBP) with or without lower extremity pain (LEP) is one of the most common reasons for seeking medical care. Previous studies investigating costs in this population targeted patients receiving surgery. Little is known about health care utilization among patients who do not undergo surgery.ObjectivesTo assess use of health care resources for LBP and LEP management and analyze associated costs.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study used a retrospective analysis of a commercial database containing inpatient and outpatient data for more than 75 million individuals. Participants were US adults who were newly diagnosed with LBP or LEP between 2008 and 2015, did not have a red-flag diagnosis, and were opiate naive prior to diagnosis. Dates of analysis were October 6, 2018, to March 7, 2019.ExposuresNewly diagnosed LBP or LEP.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was total cost of care within the first 6 and 12 months following diagnosis, stratified by whether patients received spinal surgery. An assessment was performed to determine whether patients who did not undergo surgery received care in accordance with proposed guidelines for conservative LBP and LEP management. Costs resulting from use of different health care services were estimated.ResultsA total of 2 498 013 adult patients with a new LBP or LEP diagnosis (median [interquartile range] age, 47 [36-58] years; 1 373 076 [55.0%] female) were identified. More than half (55.7%) received no intervention. Only 1.2% of patients received surgery, but they accounted for 29.3% of total 12-month costs ($784 million). Total costs of care among the 98.8% of patients who did not receive surgery were $1.8 billion. Patients who did not undergo surgery frequently received care that was inconsistent with clinical guidelines for LBP and LEP: 32.3% of these patients received imaging within 30 days of diagnosis and 35.3% received imaging without a trial of physical therapy.Conclusions and relevanceThe findings suggest that surgery is rare among patients with newly diagnosed LBP and LEP but remains a significant driver of spending. Early imaging in patients who do not undergo surgery was also a major driver of increased health care expenditures. Avoidable costs among patients with typically self-limited conditions result in considerable economic burden to the US health care system.
| S-EPMC6512284 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The main objective was to investigate whether children aged 9-15 years at baseline were more likely to experience an incident event of spinal pain after experiencing lower extremity pain. Children's musculoskeletal pain was monitored by weekly mobile phone text message responses from parents, indicating whether the child had spinal pain, lower extremity pain, or upper extremity pain the preceding week. Data were analyzed using mixed effect logistic regression models and cox regression models. The association between an incident event of spinal pain and LE pain the preceding weeks increased with increasing observation period and was statistically significant for 12 and 20 weeks (OR = 1.34 (95% CI 1.05 to 1.70) and OR = 1.39 (95% CI 1.11 to 1.75), respectively). We found that the likelihood increased in children with more frequent or longer duration of lower extremity pain. The reversed relationship was investigated as well, and we also found a positive association between spinal pain and a subsequent incidence event of lower extremity pain, but less pronounced.Conclusion: Children were more likely to experience an incident event of spinal pain after experiencing lower extremity pain. The likelihood increased in children with more frequent or longer duration of lower extremity pain. What is Known: • Both spinal pain and lower extremity pain often start early in life and is common already in adolescence. What is New: • Children were more likely to experience an incident event of spinal pain after experiencing LE pain. • The likelihood increased in children with more frequent or longer duration of LE pain.
| S-EPMC6244689 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe morbidity and mortality associated with opioid and benzodiazepine co-prescription is a pressing national concern. Little is known about patterns of opioid and benzodiazepine use in patients with acute low back pain or lower extremity pain.ObjectiveTo characterize patterns of opioid and benzodiazepine prescribing among opioid-naïve, newly diagnosed low back pain (LBP) or lower extremity pain (LEP) patients and to investigate the relationship between benzodiazepine prescribing and long-term opioid use.Design/settingWe performed a retrospective analysis of a commercial database containing claims for more than 75 million enrollees in the USA.ParticipantsParticipants were adult patients newly diagnosed with LBP or LEP between 2008 and 2015 who did not have a red flag diagnosis, had not received an opioid prescription in the 6 months prior to diagnosis, and had 12 months of continuous enrollment after diagnosis.Main outcomes and measuresAmong patients receiving at least one opioid prescription within 12 months of diagnosis, we defined discrete patterns of benzodiazepine prescribing-continued use, new use, stopped use, and never use. We tested the association of these prescription patterns with long-term opioid use, defined as six or more fills within 12 months.ResultsWe identified 2,497,653 opioid-naïve patients with newly diagnosed LBP or LEP. Between 2008 and 2015, 31.9% and 11.5% of these patients received opioid and benzodiazepine prescriptions, respectively, within 12 months of diagnosis. Rates of opioid prescription decreased from 34.8% in 2008 to 27.0% in 2015 (P?<?0.001); however, prescribing of benzodiazepines only decreased from 11.6% in 2008 to 10.8% in 2015. Patients with continued or new benzodiazepine use consistently used more opioids than patients who never used or stopped using benzodiazepines during the study period (one-way ANOVA, P?<?0.001). For patients with continued and new benzodiazepine use, the odds ratio of long-term opioid use compared with those never prescribed a benzodiazepine was 2.99 (95% CI, 2.89-3.08) and 2.68 (95% CI, 2.62-2.75), respectively.LimitationsThis study used administrative claims analyses, which rely on accuracy and completeness of diagnostic, procedural, and prescription codes.ConclusionOverall opioid prescribing for low back pain or lower extremity pain decreased substantially during the study period, indicating a shift in management within the medical community. Rates of benzodiazepine prescribing, however, remained at approximately 11%. Concurrent prescriptions of benzodiazepines and opioids after LBP or LEP diagnosis were associated with increased risk of long-term opioid use.
| S-EPMC6957597 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study designRetrospective observational study.ObjectivesThere is no consensus to predict improvement of lower back pain (LBP) in lumbar spinal stenosis after decompression surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the improvement of LBP and analyze the preoperative predicting factors for residual LBP.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed 119 patients who underwent lumbar decompression surgery without fusion and had a minimum follow-up of 1 year. LBP was evaluated using the numerical rating scale (NRS), Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ) LBP score, and Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ). All patients were divided into LBP improved group (group I) and LBP residual group (group R) according to the NRS score. Radiographic images were examined preoperatively and at the final follow-up. We evaluated spinopelvic radiological parameters and analyzed the differences between group I and group R.ResultsLBP was significantly improved after decompression surgery (LBP NRS, 5.7 vs 2.6, P < .001; JOABPEQ LBP score, 41.3 vs 79.6, P < .001; RMDQ, 10.3 vs 3.6, P < .001). Of 119 patients, 94 patients were allocated to group I and 25 was allocated to group R. There was significant difference in preoperative thoracolumbar kyphosis between group I and group R.ConclusionsMost cases of LBP in lumbar spinal stenosis were improved after decompression surgery without fusion. Preoperative thoracolumbar kyphosis predicted residual LBP after decompression surgery.
| S-EPMC7882817 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLimb amputation due to lower extremity arterial injury is not uncommon and multilevel arterial injury is even more limb-threatening and easily missed with potentially devastating consequences. There is limited information on multilevel arterial injuries.PurposeWe undertook a review of our experience to gain insight on multilevel arterial injury patterns associated with lower extremity trauma and to analyze the results of management of such injuries with a special focus on the influence of initial diagnosis on limb salvage.Patients and methodsBetween August 2002 and September 2012, 38 patients with lower extremity multilevel arterial injuries were reviewed, retrospectively. The injury patterns and amputation rates associated with initial diagnosis or misdiagnosis were analyzed.ResultsAccording to their injury levels, three multilevel arterial injury patterns were seen in this series: arterial injuries with the involvement of femoral artery and popliteal artery (pattern A), femoral artery and anterior or (and) posterior artery (pattern B), and popliteal artery and anterior or (and) posterior artery (pattern C). The general missed diagnosis rate was 31.6%. Pattern B had a much higher missed diagnosis rate than the other two patterns. The missed diagnosis rate was significantly correlated with the amputation rates (Odds Ratio =10.7, 95% CI: 2.04-56.61). The definite diagnosis rate was only 14.8% using duplex ultrasonography examination.ConclusionsDiagnosis of pattern B injury is more prone to be missed. DUS has low specificity in the detection of multilevel arterial injuries. Aggressive intraoperative exploration is considered to be valuable in the definitive diagnosis of highly suspected cases when other diagnostic tools are unavailable.
| S-EPMC4368051 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Chronic low back and lower extremity pain is mainly caused by lumbar disc herniation (LDH) and radiculitis. Various surgery and nonsurgical modalities, including epidural injections, have been used to treat LDH or radiculitis. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to assess the effects of the two interventions in managing various chronic low and lower extremity pain.A systematic literature search was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which compared the effect of local anesthetic with or without steroids. The outcomes included pain relief, functional improvement, opioid intake, and therapeutic procedural characteristics. Pooled estimates were calculated using a random-effects or fixed-effects model, depending on the heterogeneity between the included studies.10 RCTs (involving 1111 patients) were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled results showed that 41.7% of patients who received local anesthetic with steroid (group 1) and 40.2% of patients who received local anesthetic alone (group 2) had significant improvement in pain relief. And the Numeric Rating Scale pain scales were significantly reduced by 4.09 scores (95% CI: -4.26, -3.91), and 4.12 (95% CI: -4.35, -3.89) scores, respectively. Similarly, 39.8% of patients in group 1 and 40.7% of patients in group 2 achieved significantly improved functional status. The Oswestry Disability Index in the two groups were reduced by 14.5 (95% CI: -15.24, -13.75) and 12.37 (95% CI: -16.13, -8.62), respectively. The average procedures per year in group 1 was 3.68 ± 1.17 and 3.68 ± 1.26 in group 2 with an average total relief per year of 31.67 ± 13.17 weeks and 32.64 ± 13.92 weeks, respectively. The opioid intake decreased from baseline by 8.81 mg (95% CI: -12.24, -5.38) and 16.92 mg (95% CI: -22.71, -11.12) in the two groups, respectively.This meta-analysis confirms that epidural injections of local anesthetic with or without steroids have beneficial but similar effects in the treatment of patients with chronic low back and lower extremity pain.
| S-EPMC4538092 | biostudies-other
Project description:To determine the prevalence of poor response to aspirin (ASA) therapy over 12-month follow-up in patients with lower extremity peripheral arterial disease (PAD), and to compare the classification agreement among different ASA response assays.Patients with PAD on ASA therapy at baseline were included from the ongoing Effect of Lipid Modification on Peripheral Arterial Disease after Endovascular Intervention Trial (ELIMIT), which is a randomized trial testing whether combination treatment with ezetimibe, niacin, and a statin will halt/regress atherosclerosis compared with statin monotherapy. Patients who had baseline platelet testing and repeat testing at 6-month or 12-month follow-up were included. ASA responsiveness was tested using three different assays: Optical aggregation with 0.5 mg/mL of arachidonic acid (AA), optical aggregation with 10 ?M of adenosine diphosphate (ADP), and platelet function analyzer-100 (PFA-100) testing with collagen/epinephrine (Epi) loaded cartridges. ASA response was defined as AA aggregation <30%, ADP aggregation <70%, or PFA-100 Epi >164 seconds. Patients who showed response to ASA at baseline were classified as Responders. Poor response to ASA was defined as AA aggregation ? 30%, ADP aggregation ? 70%, or PFA-100 Epi ? 164 seconds. Patients who showed poor response (PR) to an assay at baseline, but then were responsive at follow-up visits were classified as Initial PRs. Patients who showed poor response at baseline and all follow-up visits were classified as Persistent PRs. The classification agreement between assays was tested using the kappa statistic.Of 102 patients randomized in ELIMIT, 80 patients satisfied inclusion criteria. There were no significant baseline demographic differences between Responders, Initial PRs, and Persistent PRs. The prevalence of persistent poor response varied by the assay used; 5% of subjects (4/80) were Persistent PRs by AA aggregation, compared with 27.5% (22/80) of subjects by ADP aggregation and 9.9% (7/71) of patients by PFA-100 Epi. Regarding the agreement of the assays, only AA aggregation and PFA-100 Epi agreed significantly (K = 0.3223; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.15-0.493; P = .0001), and though statistically significant, the magnitude of this agreement is small. AA aggregation and ADP aggregation did not agree (K = 0.1161; 95% CI -0.004-0.236; P = .029), nor did ADP aggregation and PFA-100 Epi (K = 0.0044; 95% CI -0.151-0.160; P = .48).Between 5% and 27.5% of PAD patients were Persistent PRs to ASA over 6- to 12-month follow-up using different platelet assays. Further, these commonly used platelet assays show weak agreement in determining poor response to aspirin.
| S-EPMC3197816 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Chronic lower back pain is a significant disease that affects nearly 20% of the worldwide population. Along with hindering patients' quality of life, chronic lower back pain is considered to be the second most common cause of disability among Americans. Treating chronic lower back pain is often a challenge for providers, especially in light of our current opioid epidemic. With this epidemic and an increased aging population, there is an imminent need for development of new pharmacologic therapeutic options, which are not only effective but also pose minimal adverse effects to the patient. With these considerations, a novel therapeutic agent called tanezumab has been developed and studied. Tanezumab is a humanized monoclonal immunoglobulin G2 antibody that works by inhibiting the binding of NGF to its receptors. NGF is involved in the function of sensory neurons and fibers involved in nociceptive transduction. It is commonly seen in excess in inflammatory joint conditions and in chronic pain patients. Nociceptors are dependent on NGF for growth and ongoing function. The inhibition of NGF binding to its receptors is a mechanism by which pain pathways can be interrupted. In this article, a number of recent randomized controlled trials are examined relating to the efficacy and safety of tanezumab in the treatment of chronic lower back pain. Although tanezumab was shown to be an effective pain modulator in major trials, several adverse effects were seen among different doses of the medication, one of which led to a clinical hold placed by the US Food and Drug Administration. In summary, tanezumab is a promising agent that warrants further investigation into its analgesic properties and safety profile.
| S-EPMC5825994 | biostudies-other