Alarming Escalation of Fusion Surgery – What Can be Done?

Alarming Escalation of Fusion Surgery – What Can be Done?

Author: Ron Feise, DC/Thursday, January 7, 2016/Categories: January/February 2016

Rate this article:
By Ron Feise, DC

IN THE UNITED STATES, SPINAL SURGERY rates over the last few decades have risen dramatically. Between 1993 and 2008, cervical fusion surgery increased 625.8 percent, and lumbar fusion surgery increased 773.6 percent.1-3 These increases accelerated when fusion cages were approved, but artificial disc replacement has not demonstrated a clinical superiority over fusion.4-7 The most common primary diagnosis for cervical and lumbar fusion is degenerative disc disease.8,9 Yet, as explained below, degenerative disc disease is not a pathologic process automatically necessitating treatment.

Spinal surgical procedures are expensive. Between 2001 and 2010, an estimated 3.6 million spinal fusions were performed in the United States accounting for more than $287 billion in total hospital charges, excluding charges associated with readmissions, rehabilitation, prescription drugs, professional fees or indirect costs associated with loss of productivity.9-11 Make no mistake; spinal surgery is big business. But is it good for patients and the U.S. healthcare system?

Double the Rates of Other Countries

The United States has the highest rate of cervical and lumbar spine surgery in the world. The spinal surgical rate in the United States is roughly twice that in New Zealand, Australia, Canada, Norway and Finland, and it is more than triple the United Kingdom’s rate.3,12,13 There is no reason to believe that there are biological differences from country to country, and epidemiological studies suggest that rates of back pain are similar among geographic areas.14,15 Compared with other developed countries, the surgical rates in the United States may be explainable: fee-for-service and easy access to care are thought to encourage spinal surgery in the United States.

Factors Behind the U.S. Surge in Spinal Surgery

• Irrelevant Imaging Findings Drive Surgery

Degenerative changes and disc herniation of the spine are biological realities, but pain and disability do not necessarily accompany these conditions. A major problem with imaging is that it can reveal issues that are alarming but irrelevant. An international research team found no evidence demonstrating that disc degeneration is a risk factor for neck pain.16 The American College of Physicians and the American Pain Society reached a similar conclusion for back conditions.17

A systematic review estimated the prevalence by age of common degenerative spine conditions on imaging in asymptomatic individuals.18 Thirty-three articles reporting imaging findings for 3,110 asymptomatic individuals revealed that about 30 percent of 20-year-olds and more than 80 percent of 80-year-olds have disc degeneration or bulge without any symptoms. This study found that imaging findings of degenerative changes, such as disc degeneration, disc bulge and disc protrusion, are generally part of the normal aging process rather than pathologic processes requiring intervention. These findings have been affirmed by numerous medical research teams for both neck and back conditions.19-39 Perhaps most important, the relationship between imaging findings and surgical outcomes has not been established.40,41

Recent scientific research has found that herniated discs can be resolved after conservative treatment or even after no treatment.42 The probability of low-back herniated disc regression without surgical treatment but after conservative treatment, such as spinal manipulation, exercise, physical therapy or NSAIDS, is 70 percent for disc extrusion and 41 percent for disc protrusion. According to medical research, active conservative treatment produces a satisfactory outcome even for patients with obviously extruded discs or marked neurological deficits.43-46

● Serious Adverse Events Ignored

Serious adverse events caused by spinal surgery are remarkably common. Several published studies conducted by independent medical research teams found that the reoperation rate (i.e., failure rate) for spinal surgery is greater than 22 percent.47-52 Serious postoperative pain and disability were experienced by more than 29 percent of patients following total lumbar disc replacement.53,54 Death rates following spinal surgery are about 5 per 1,000 operations,9,55-57 and blindness following spinal surgery is estimated at more than 1 per 1,000 operations.58-60 Despite these serious and catastrophic occurrences, it is well known that spinal surgeons routinely underreport adverse events.61

● Surgery for Non-Serious Symptoms

You would think that risky spinal surgery is reserved for serious cases with high levels of pain and high levels of dysfunction. Unfortunately, it is not. Many of the research subjects undergoing surgery have only mild to moderate pain and dysfunction,62-71 and many have never been screened for depression, anxiety or catastrophizing.72-81 Yet, many of these patients have these psychological co-morbidities, which amplify pain and dysfunction and thereby increase the probability that the pain condition will persist over an extended period of time.82-103 Many spinal surgical clinical trials do not even require a minimum amount of pain intensity or dysfunction before surgery is administered. Among trials that include pain intensity or dysfunction inclusion criteria, most establish very low entry requirements.49,104-114 This promotes the use of surgical procedures in patients with non-serious symptoms who are better suited for nonsurgical approaches.

● Misleading Informed Consent

The International Society for Study of the Lumbar Spine has developed a research-based informed consent sheet for spinal surgery outlining the odds of occurrence for various complications, with appropriate emphasis on “serious or frequently occurring risks.”115 The document is a good first step, but it is incomplete, because it fails to provide risks and benefits for alternatives to surgery, fails to include a crucial summary statistic — the probability that at least one of the listed adverse events will occur (the risk is 30 percent) — and omits some serious adverse events, such as the risks of death and blindness. In most cases, patients should consider spinal surgery optional, and they should have information to assess the risks and benefits of their treatment alternatives. Shockingly, most spinal surgeons do not even provide the industry-established informed consent to their patients. [Editor’s Note: Informed consent documents by law do not have to report the risks and benefits of alternatives to the therapy being offered, only that alternatives exist.]

• Spinal Surgeons Resist Placebo Trials

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials are the gold standard for evaluating interventions and are routinely used to assess medical therapies.116,117 But spinal surgeons have been reluctant to use imitation surgery as a placebo control in the evaluation of spinal surgery.118,119 It is well-known that even an ineffective surgery can carry a larger placebo effect than nonsurgical treatments.120-124 So the question remains: Could the supposed benefits attributable to spinal surgery just be placebo? [Editor’s note: Placebo surgeries are ethically difficult to do and few have been done in the modern era.]


● Medicare and all insurance companies should refuse all payments for cases that have a diagnosis associated with disc herniation/degeneration and/or spinal arthritis.

● State medical boards, medical societies and insurance companies should require that all potential surgery patients receive a written informed consent that outlines all possible adverse events, similar to the document from the International Society for Study of the Lumbar Spine. The document should be revised to include a summary adverse event statistic, as well as the risks and benefits for alternative strategies.

● All patients should be required to be screened (and treated, as necessary) by a psychologist for depression, anxiety and catastrophizing. All patients (i.e., especially patients with mild to moderate pain/dysfunction) should be treated for 12 to 24 months with nonsurgical interventions, such as spinal manipulation, physical therapy and spinal rehabilitation, before considering surgery.

● Qualified researchers from both surgical and nonsurgical camps should conduct at least two quality randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials to assess the efficacy of spinal surgery.



1. Cowan JA Jr, Dimick JB, Wainess R, Upchurch GR Jr, Chandler WF, La Marca F. Changes in the utilization of spinal fusion in the United States. Neurosurgery. 2006;59:15-20.


2. Deyo RA, Gray DT, Kreuter W, Mirza S, Martin BIUS. Trends in lumbar fusion surgery for degenerative conditions. Spine. 2005;30:1441-1445.


3. Rajaee SS, Bae HW, Kanim LE, Delamarter RB. Spinal fusion in the United States: analysis of trends from 1998 to 2008.Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2012;37:67-76.


4. Anderson JT, Haas AR, Percy R, Woods ST, Ahn UM, Ahn NU. Single-level lumbar fusion for degenerative disc disease is associated with worse outcomes compared with fusion for spondylolisthesis in a workers' compensation setting. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976) 2015;40:323-31.


5. Chou R, Baisden J, Carragee EJ, Resnick DK, Shaffer WO, Loeser JD. Surgery for low back pain: a review of the evidence for an American Pain Society Clinical Practice Guideline. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976) 2009;34:1094-109.


6. Jacobs W, Van der Gaag NA, Tuschel A, de Kleuver M, Peul W, Verbout AJ, Oner FC. Total disc replacement for chronic back pain in the presence of disc degeneration. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Sep 12;9:CD008326.


7. World Health Organization. Medical Devices: Managing the Mismatch. Geneva, Switzerland. World Health Organization; 2010.


8. Campbell B , Stainthorpe AC , Longson CM. How can we get high quality routine data to monitor the safety of devices and procedures? BMJ. 2013;346:f2782.


9. Goz V, Weinreb JH, McCarthy I, Schwab F, Lafage V, Errico TJ. Perioperative complications and mortality after spinal fusions: analysis of trends and risk factors. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2013;38:1970-6.


10. McAnany SJ, Overley S, Baird EO, Cho SK, Hecht AC, Zigler JE, Qureshi SA. The 5-year cost-effectiveness of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion and cervical disc replacement: a Markov analysis. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2014;39:1924-33.


11. U.S. Health Care Costs. 2012; Available at: http://www.kaiseredu. org/issue-modules/us-health-care-costs/background-brief.aspx. Accessed Sept. 30, 2012.


12. Cherkin DC, Deyo RA, Loeser JD, Bush T, Waddell G. An international comparison of back surgery rates. Spine.1994;19:1201-1206.


13. The NHS Information Centre, Hospital Episode Statistics for England. Inpatient statistics, 2008-09.


14. Schafer J, O'Connor D, Feinglass S, Salive M. Medicare Evidence Development and Coverage Advisory Committee Meeting on lumbar fusion surgery for treatment of chronic back pain from degenerative disc disease. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2007;32:2403-4.


15. Woolf AD, Pfleger B. Burden of major musculoskeletal conditions. Bull World Health Organ. 2003;81:646-56.


16. Hogg-Johnson S, van der Velde G, Carroll LJ, et al. The burden and determinants of neck pain in the general population. Results of the Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders. Spine. 2008;33(Suppl):S39-S51.


17. Chou R, Qaseem A, Snow V, Casey D, Cross JT, Shekelle P, Owens DK. Diagnosis and treatment of low back pain: a joint clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Pain Society. Ann Intern Med.2007;147:478 –91.


18. Brinjikji W, Luetmer PH, Comstock B, Bresnahan BW, Chen LE, Deyo RA, Halabi S, Turner JA, Avins AL, James K, Wald JT, Kallmes DF, Jarvik JG. Systematic Literature Review of Imaging Features of Spinal Degeneration in Asymptomatic Populations. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2014 Nov 27.


19. Berg L, Hellum C, Gjertsen O, et al. Do more MRI findings imply worse disability or more intense low back pain? A cross-sectional study of candidates for lumbar disc prosthesis. Skeletal Radiol. 2013;42:1593–602.


20. Boden SD, Davis DO, Dina TS, et al. Abnormal magnetic-resonance scans of the lumbar spine in asymptomatic subjects: a prospective investigation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1990;72:403–08.


21. Bovim G, Schrader H, Sand T. Neck pain in the general population. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 1994;19(12):1307–9.


22. Chou R, Fu R, Carrino JA, et al. Imaging strategies for low-back pain: systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2009;373:463–72.


23. French SD, Walker BF, Cameron M, Pollard HP, Vitiello AL, Reggars JW, et al. Risk management for chiropractors and osteopaths: imaging guidelines for conditions commonly seen in practice. Aust Chir Osteo. 2003;11:41–8.


24. Gore DR, Sepie SB, Gardner GM, Murray PM. Neck pain: a long-term follow up of 205 patients. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 1987;12:1-5.


25. Greenberg JO, Schnell RG. Magnetic resonance imaging of the lumbar spine in asymptomatic adults: cooperative study—American Society of Neuroimaging. J Neuroimaging. 1991;1:2-7.


26. Heller CA, Stanley P, Lewis-Jones B, Heller RF. Value of x ray examinations of the cervical spine. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1983;287:1276-8.


27. Jarvik JG, Deyo RA. Diagnostic evaluation of low back pain with emphasis on imaging. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137:586-97.


28. Jarvik JG, Hollingworth W, Heagerty PJ, et al. Three-year incidence of low back pain in an initially asymptomatic cohort: clinical and imaging risk factors. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2005;30:1541-48; discussion1549.


29. Jarvik JJ, Hollingworth W, Heagerty P, et al. The Longitudinal Assessment of Imaging and Disability of the Back (LAIDBack) study: baseline data. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2001;26:1158–66.


30. Kaneoka K, Shimizu K, Hangai M, et al. Lumbar intervertebral disc degeneration in elite competitive swimmers: a case control study. Am J Sports Med. 2007;35:1341-45.


31. Kovacs FM, Arana E, Royuela A, et al. Vertebral endplate changes are not associated with chronic low back pain among Southern European subjects: a case control study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2012;33:1519-24.


32. Kraft CN, Pennekamp PH, Becker U, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging findings of the lumbar spine in elite horseback riders: correlations with back pain, body mass index, trunk/leg-length coefficient, and riding discipline. Am J Sports Med. 2009;37: 2205-13.


33. Laplante BL, DePalma MJ. Spine osteoarthritis. Am Acad Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2012;4(5 Suppl):S28-36.


34. Modic MT, Obuchowski NA, Ross JS, et al. Acute low back pain and radiculopathy: MR imaging findings and their prognostic role and effect on outcome. Radiology. 2005;237:597-604.


35. Rudy IS, Poulos A, Owen L, Batters A, Kieliszek K, Willox J, Jenkins H. The correlation of radiographic findings and patient symptomatology in cervical degenerative joint disease: a cross-sectional study. Chiropr Man Therap. 2015;23:9.


36. Sasiadek MJ, Bladowska J. Imaging of degenerative spine disease – the state of the art. Adv Clin Exp Med.2012;21:133–42.


37. Steffens D, Ferreira ML, Latimer J, Ferreira PH, Koes BW, Blyth F, Li Q, Maher CG. What triggers an episode of acute low back pain? A case-crossover study. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2015;67:403-10.


38. Takatalo J, Karppinen J, Niinima¨ki J, et al. Association of Modic changes, Schmorl’s nodes, spondylolytic defects, high-intensity zone lesions, disc herniations, and radial tears with low back symptom severity among young Finnish adults.Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2012;37:1231-39.


39. Teraguchi M, Yoshimura N, Hashizume H, et al. Prevalence and distribution of intervertebral disc degeneration over the entire spine in a population-based cohort: the Wakayama Spine Study. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2014;22:104-10.


40. Carlisle E, Luna M, Tsou PM, et al. Percent spinal canal compromise on MRI utilized for predicting the need for surgical treatment in single-level lumbar intervertebral disc herniation. Spine J. 2005;5: 608–14.


41. Lurie JD, Moses RA, Tosteson AN, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging predictors of surgical outcome in patients with lumbar intervertebral disc herniation. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2013;38:1216–25.


42. Chiu CC, Chuang TY, Chang KH, Wu CH, Lin PW, Hsu WY. The probability of spontaneous regression of lumbar herniated disc: a systematic review. Clin Rehabil. 2015;29:184-95.


43. Bush K, Cowan N, Katz DE, et al. The natural history of sciatica associated with disc pathology. A prospective study with clinical and independent radiologic follow-up. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 1992; 17:1205-1212.


44. Jensen TS, Albert HB, Soerensen JS, et al. Natural course of disc morphology in patients with sciatica: an MRI study using a standardized qualitative classification system. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2006; 31:1605-12.


45. Saal JA and Saal JS. Nonoperative treatment of herniated lumbar intervertebral disc with radiculopathy. An outcome study. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 1989;14:431-437.


46. Weber H. Lumbar disc herniation. A controlled, prospective study with ten years of observation. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 1983; 8:131-40.


47. Kim CH, Chung CK, Park CS, Choi B, Hahn S, Kim MJ, Lee KS, Park BJ. Reoperation rate after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis without spondylolisthesis: a nationwide cohort study. Spine J. 2013;13:1230-7.


48. Moojen WA, Arts MP, Jacobs WC, van Zwet EW, van den Akker-van Marle ME, Koes BW, Vleggeert-Lankamp CL, Peul WC; Leiden-The Hague Spine Intervention Prognostic Study Group. Interspinous process device versus standard conventional surgical decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: randomized controlled trial. BMJ. 2013;347:f6415.


49. Nunley PD, Jawahar A, Kerr EJ 3rd, Gordon CJ, Cavanaugh DA, Birdsong EM, Stocks M, Danielson G. Factors affecting the incidence of symptomatic adjacent-level disease in cervical spine after total disc arthroplasty: 2- to 4-year follow-up of 3 prospective randomized trials. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2012;37:445-51.


50. Shim CS, Lee SH, Shin HD, Kang HS, Choi WC, Jung B, Choi G, Ahn Y, Lee S, Lee HY. CHARITE versus ProDisc: a comparative study of a minimum 3-year follow-up. Spine. 2007;32:1012-8.


51. Xia XP, Chen HL, Cheng HB. Prevalence of adjacent segment degeneration after spine surgery: a systematic review and meta analysis. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2013;38:597-608.


52. Xu R, Bydon M, Macki M, De la Garza-Ramos R, Sciubba DM, Wolinsky JP, Witham TF, Gokaslan ZL, Bydon A. Adjacent segment disease after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: clinical outcomes after first repeat surgery versus second repeat surgery. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2014;39:120-6.


53. Ohnmeiss DD, Bodemer W, Zigler JE. Effect of adverse events on low back surgery outcome: twenty-four-month follow-up results from a Food And Drug Administration investigational device exemption trial. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2010;35:835-8.


54. Siepe CJ, Korge A, Grochulla F, Mehren C, Mayer HM. Analysis of post-operative pain patterns following total lumbar disc replacement: results from fluoroscopically guided spine infiltrations. Eur Spine J. 2008;17:44-56.


55. Deyo RA, Mirza SK, Martin BI, Kreuter W, Goodman DC, Jarvik JG. Trends, major medical complications, and charges associated with surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis in older adults. JAMA. 2010;303:1259-65.


56. Hartig D, Batke J, Dea N, Kelly A, Fisher C, Street J. Adverse events in surgically treated cervical spondylopathic myelopathy: a prospective validated observational study. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2015;40:292-8.


57. Kurtz SM, Lau E, Ianuzzi A, Schmier J, Todd L, Isaza J, Albert TJ. National Revision Burden for Lumbar Total Disc Replacement in the United States: Epidemiologic and Economic Perspectives. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2010;35:690–696.


58. Lee LA, Newman NJ, Wagner TA, Dettori JR, Dettori NJ. Postoperative ischemic optic neuropathy. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2010;35(9 Suppl):S105-16.


59. Roth S, Barach P. Postoperative visual loss. Still no answers-yet. Editorial views. Anesthesiology. 2001;95:575- 577.


60. Stevens WR, Glazer PA, Kelley SD, et al. Ophthalmic complications after spinal surgery. Spine. 1997;22:1319-1324.


61. Edwards II CC, Karpitskaya Y, Cha C, et al. Accurate identification of adverse outcomes after cervical spine surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86:251–6.


62. Rönnberg K, Lind B, Zoëga B, Halldin K, Gellerstedt M, Brisby H. Patients' satisfaction with provided care/information and expectations on clinical outcome after lumbar disc herniation surgery. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2007;32:256-61.


63. Fernández-Fairen M, Sala P, Dufoo M Jr, Ballester J, Murcia A, Merzthal L. Anterior cervical fusion with tantalum implant: a prospective randomized controlled study. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2008;33:465-72.


64. McGirt MJ, Eustacchio S, Varga P, Vilendecic M, Trummer M, Gorensek M, Ledic D, Carragee EJ.  A prospective cohort study of close interval computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging after primary lumbar discectomy: factors associated with recurrent disc herniation and disc height loss. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2009;34:2044-51.


65. Pitzen TR, Chrobok J, Stulik J, Ruffing S, Drumm J, Sova L, Kucera R, Vyskocil T, Steudel WI. Implant complications, fusion, loss of lordosis, and outcome after anterior cervical plating with dynamic or rigid plates: two-year results of a multi-centric, randomized, controlled study. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2009;34:641-6.


66. Bell KM, Bechara BP, Hartman RA, Shively C, Frazier EC, Lee JY, Kang JD, Donaldson WF. Influence of number of operated levels and postoperative time on active range of motion following anterior cervical decompression and fusion procedures. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2011;36:263-8.


67. Hermansen A, Hedlund R, Vavruch L, Peolsson A. A comparison between the carbon fiber cage and the cloward procedure in cervical spine surgery: a ten- to thirteen-year follow-up of a prospective randomized study. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2011;36:919-25.


68. Peng CW, Yue WM, Basit A, Guo CM, Tow BP, Chen JL, Nidu M, Yeo W, Tan SB. Intermediate Results of the Prestige LP Cervical Disc Replacement: Clinical and Radiological Analysis With Minimum Two-Year Follow-up. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2011;36:E105-11.


69. Engquist M, Löfgren H, Öberg B, Holtz A, Peolsson A, Söderlund A, Vavruch L, Lind B. Surgery versus nonsurgical treatment of cervical radiculopathy: a prospective, randomized study comparing surgery plus physiotherapy with physiotherapy alone with a 2-year follow-up. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2013;38:1715-22.


70. Vaccaro A, Beutler W, Peppelman W, Marzluff JM, Highsmith J, Mugglin A, DeMuth G, Gudipally M, Baker KJ. Clinical outcomes with selectively constrained SECURE-C cervical disc arthroplasty: two-year results from a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter investigational device exemption study. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2013;38:2227-39.


71. Louw A, Diener I, Landers MR, Puentedura EJ. Preoperative pain neuroscience education for lumbar radiculopathy: a multicenter randomized controlled trial with 1-year follow-up. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2014;39:1449-57.


72. Yang S, Wu X, Hu Y, Li J, Liu G, Xu W, Yang C, Ye S. Early and intermediate follow-up results after treatment of degenerative disc disease with the Bryan cervical disc prosthesis: single- and multiple-level. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2008;33:E371-7.


73. Rasmussen S, Krum-Møller DS, Lauridsen LR, Jensen SE, Mandøe H, Gerlif C, Kehlet H. Epidural steroid following discectomy for herniated lumbar disc reduces neurological impairment and enhances recovery: a randomized study with two-year follow-up. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2008;33:2028-33.


74. Ohtori S, Yamashita M, Yamauchi K, Inoue G, Koshi T, Suzuki M, Orita S, Eguchi Y, Ochiai N, Kishida S, Takaso M, Aoki Y, Ishikawa T, Arai G, Miyagi M, Kamoda H, Nakamura J, Takahashi K. Low back pain after lumbar discectomy in patients showing endplate Modic type 1 change. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2010;35:E596-600.


75. Kolstad F, Nygaard ØP, Andresen H, Leivseth G. Anterior cervical arthrodesis using a "stand alone" cylindrical titanium cage: prospective analysis of radiographic parameters. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2010;35:1545-50.


76. Kim DH, Dai F, Belfer I, Banco RJ, Martha JF, Tighiouart H, Tromanhauser SG, Jenis LG, Hunter DJ, Schwartz CE. Polymorphic variation of the guanosine triphosphate cyclohydrolase 1 gene predicts outcome in patients undergoing surgical treatment for lumbar degenerative disc disease. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2010;35:1909-14.


77. Datta G, McGregor A, Medhi-Zadeh S, Khalil N, Hughes SP. The impact of intermittent retraction on paraspinal muscle function during lumbar surgery. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2010;35:E1050-7.


78. Ohtori S, Koshi T, Yamashita M, Yamauchi K, Inoue G, Suzuki M, Orita S, Eguchi Y, Ochiai N, Kishida S, Takaso M, Kuniyoshi K, Aoki Y, Ishikawa T, Arai G, Miyagi M, Kamoda H, Suzuki M, Nakamura J, Toyone T, Takahashi K. Surgical versus nonsurgical treatment of selected patients with discogenic low back pain: a small-sized randomized trial. Spine.(Phila Pa 1976). 2011;36:347-54.


79. Blondel B, Tropiano P, Gaudart J, Huang RC, Marnay T. Clinical results of lumbar total disc arthroplasty in accordance with Modic signs, with a 2-year-minimum follow-up. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2011;36:2309-15.


80. Nunley PD, Jawahar A, Kerr EJ 3rd, Gordon CJ, Cavanaugh DA, Birdsong EM, Stocks M, Danielson G. Factors affecting the incidence of symptomatic adjacent-level disease in cervical spine after total disc arthroplasty: 2- to 4-year follow-up of 3 prospective randomized trials. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2012;37:445-51.


81. Skeppholm M, Olerud C. Comparison of dysphagia between cervical artificial disc replacement and fusion: data from a randomized controlled study with two years of follow-up. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2013;38:E1507-10.


82. Boersma K, Linton SJ. Expectancy, fear and pain in the prediction of chronic pain and disability: A prospective analysis.Eur J Pain. 2006;10:551-7.


83. Carroll LJ, Holm LW, Hogg-Johnson S, Côtè P, Cassidy JD, Haldeman S, Nordin M, Hurwitz EL, Carragee EJ, van der Velde G, Peloso PM, Guzman J. Course and prognostic factors for neck pain in whiplash-associated disorders (WAD): results of the Bone and Joint Decade 2000-2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2009;32:S97-S107.


84. Coudeyre E, Rannou F, Tubach F, Baron G, Coriat F, Brin S, Revel M, Poiraudeau S. General practitioners' fear avoidance beliefs influence their management of patients with low back pain. Pain.2006;124:330-7.


85. Ebell MH. Screening instruments for depression. Am Fam Physician. 2008;78:244-6.


86. Grotle M, Vollestad NK, Brox JI. Clinical course and impact of fear-avoidance beliefs in low back pain: prospective cohort study of acute and chronic low back pain: II. Spine. 2006;31:1038-46.


87. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB. The Patient Health Questionnaire-2: validity of a two-item depression screener.Med Care. 2003;41:1284-1292.


88. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB, Monahan PO, Lowe B. Anxiety disorders in primary care: prevalence, impairment, comorbidity, and detection. Ann Intern Med. 2007;146:317-25.


89. Linton SJ. Psychological factors in neck and low back pain. In: Nachemson AN, Jonsson E, eds. Neck and Back Pain: The Scientific Evidence of Causes, Diagnosis and Treatment. New York: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2000. 


90. Löwe B, Kroenke K, Gräfe K. Detecting and monitoring depression with a two-item questionnaire (PHQ-2). J Psychosom Res. 2005;58:163-171.


91. Nieto R, Miró J, Huguet A. The fear-avoidance model in whiplash injuries. Eur J Pain. 2009;13:518-23.


92. Osman A, Barrios FX, Kopper BA, Hauptmann W, Jones J, O’Neill E. Factor structure, reliability, and validity of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale. J Behav Med. 1997;20:589-605.


93. Pavlin, D.J., Sullivan, M.J.L., Freund, P.R., Roesen, K. Catastrophizing: A risk factor for post-surgical pain. Clin J Pain.2004.


94. Picavet HS, Vlaeyen JW, Schouten JS. Pain catastrophizing and kinesiophobia: predictors of chronic low back pain. Am J Epidemiol. 2002;156:1028-1034.


95. Sullivan M J L, Bishop S, Pivik J. The Pain Catastrophizing Scale: Development and validation. Psychol Assess. 1995;7:524-532.


96. Sullivan MJL, Tripp DA, Santor D. Gender differences in pain and pain behavior: The role of catastrophizing. Cog Ther Res. 2000;21:555-568.


97. Sullivan, M. J. L. Toward a biopsychomotor conceptualisation of pain. Clin J Pain. 2008;24:281-290.


98. Sullivan, M. J. L., Adams, A., Horan, S., et al. The role of perceived injustice in the experience of chronic pain and disability: Scale development and validation. J Occ Rehab. 2008;18:249-261.


99. Swinkels-Meewisse IE, Roelofs J, Schouten EG, Verbeek AL, Oostendorp RA, Vlaeyen JW. Fear of movement/(re)injury predicting chronic disabling low back pain: a prospective inception cohort study. Spine. 2006;31:658-64.


100. Van Damme, S., Crombez, G., Eccleston, C. Retarded disengagement from pain cues: the effects of pain catastrophizing and pain expectancy. Pain. 2002;100:111-118.


101. Waddell G , Nachemson AL, Philips RB. The Back Pain Revolution. London: Churchill Livingstone, 1998.                                  


102. Waddell G, Waddell H. Social influences on neck and low back pain. In: Nachemson AN, Jonsson E, eds. Neck and Back Pain: The Scientific Evidence of Causes, Diagnosis and Treatment. New York: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2000. 


103. Waddell, G., Burton, A.K., Main, C.J. Screening to identify people at risk of long-term incapacity for work. London UK: Royal Society of Medicine Press, 2003.


104. Bailey A, Araghi A, Blumenthal S, Huffmon GV; Anular Repair Clinical Study Group. Prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled study of anular repair in lumbar discectomy: two-year follow-up. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2013;38:1161-9.


105. Balderston JR, Gertz ZM, McIntosh T, Balderston RA. Long-term Outcomes of 2-Level Total Disc Replacement Using ProDisc-L Nine- to 10-Year Follow-up.  Spine. 2014;39:906–910.


106. Gornet MF, Burkus JK, Dryer RF, Peloza JH. Lumbar disc arthroplasty with Maverick disc versus stand-alone interbody fusion: a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter investigational device exemption trial. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2011;36:E1600-11.


107. Guyer RD, Pettine K, Roh JS, Dimmig TA, Coric D, McAfee PC, Ohnmeiss DD. Comparison of 2 lumbar total disc replacements: results of a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter Food and Drug Administration trial with 24-month follow-up. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2014;39:925-31.


108. Hellum C, Berg L, Gjertsen Ø, Johnsen LG, Neckelmann G, Storheim K, Keller A, Grundnes O, Espeland A; Norwegian Spine Study Group. Adjacent level degeneration and facet arthropathy after disc prosthesis surgery or rehabilitation in patients with chronic low back pain and degenerative disc: second report of a randomized study. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2012;37:2063-73.


109. Johnsen LG, Hellum C, Storheim K, Nygaard ØP, Brox JI, Rossvoll I, Rø M, Andresen H, Lydersen S, Grundnes O, Pedersen M, Leivseth G, Olafsson G, Borgström F, Fritzell P; Norwegian Spine Study Group. Cost-effectiveness of total disc replacement versus multidisciplinary rehabilitation in patients with chronic low back pain: a Norwegian multicenter RCT.Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2014;39:23-32.


110. Phillips FM, Lee JY, Geisler FH, Cappuccino A, Chaput CD, DeVine JG, Reah C, Gilder KM, Howell KM, McAfee PC. A prospective, randomized, controlled clinical investigation comparing PCM cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. 2-year results from the US FDA IDE clinical trial. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2013;38:E907-18.


111. Sasso RC, Smucker JD, Hacker RJ, Heller JG. Artificial disc versus fusion: a prospective, randomized study with 2-year follow-up on 99 patients. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2007;32:2933-40.


112. Sasso RC, Foulk DM, Hahn M. Prospective, randomized trial of metal-on-metal artificial lumbar disc replacement: initial results for treatment of discogenic pain. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2008;33:123-31.


113. Vaccaro A, Beutler W, Peppelman W, Marzluff JM, Highsmith J, Mugglin A, DeMuth G, Gudipally M, Baker KJ. Clinical outcomes with selectively constrained SECURE-C cervical disc arthroplasty: two-year results from a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter investigational device exemption study. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2013 Dec;38:2227-39.


114. Zigler JE, Delamarter R, Murrey D, Spivak J, Janssen M. ProDisc-C and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion as surgical treatment for single-level cervical symptomatic degenerative disc disease: five-year results of a Food and Drug Administration study. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2013;38:203-9.


115. Ng CY, Gibson JN. An aid to the explanation of surgical risks and complications: the International Spinal Surgery Information Sheet. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2011;36:2333-45.


116. Brox JI, Sorensen R, Friis A, Nygaard O, Indahl A, Keller A, Ingebrigtsen T, Eriksen HR, Holm I, Koller AK, Riise R, Reikeras O. Randomized clinical trial of lumbar instrumented fusion and cognitive intervention and exercises in patients with chronic low back pain and disc degeneration. Spine. 2003;28:1913-21.


117. Carragee EJ, Deyo RA, Kovacs FM, Peul WC, Lurie JD, Urrútia G, Corbin TP, Schoene ML. Clinical research: is the spine field a mine field? Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2009;34:423-30.


118. Machado GC, Ferreira PH, Harris IA, Pinheiro MB, Koes BW, van Tulder M, Rzewuska M, Maher CG, Ferreira ML. Effectiveness of surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0122800.


119. Vaccaro AR, Fehlings MG. The applicability of clinical equipoise and sham surgery in patients with symptomatic lumbar radiculopathy due to a herniated disc: the SPORT trial. Spine. (Phila Pa 1976). 2007;32:2039-40.


120. Weijer C. I need a placebo like I need a hole in the head. J Law Med Ethics. 2002;30: 69-72.


121. Bannuru RR, Schmid CH, Kent DM, Vaysbrot EE, Wong JB, McAlindon TE. Comparative effectiveness of pharmacologic interventions for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162:46-54.


122. Miller F (2012) The enduring legacy of sham-controlled trials of internal mammary artery ligation. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 55:245-250.


123. Möller H, Hedlund R (2000) Surgery versus conservative management in adult isthmic spondylolisthesis––a prospective randomized study: part 1. Spine. 2000;25:1711-1715.


124. Sihvonen R, Paavola M, Malmivaara A, Itala A, Joukainen A et al (2013) Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy versus sham surgery for a degenerative meniscal tear. N Engl J Med. 369:2515-2524.


Number of views (8331)/Comments (0)

Please login or register to post comments.

Theme picker