Treatment Options for Failed Back Surgery Syndrome: An Umbrella Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews on the Effectiveness of Therapeutic Interventions.

IF 1.2 Q3 SURGERY
Spine Surgery and Related Research Pub Date : 2023-08-10 eCollection Date: 2024-03-27 DOI:10.22603/ssrr.2023-0032
Hernán Gallego, Sergio Arango, Andrés Combalia, Salvador Fuster, Catalina Jaramillo, Ana Milena Herrera
{"title":"Treatment Options for Failed Back Surgery Syndrome: An Umbrella Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews on the Effectiveness of Therapeutic Interventions.","authors":"Hernán Gallego, Sergio Arango, Andrés Combalia, Salvador Fuster, Catalina Jaramillo, Ana Milena Herrera","doi":"10.22603/ssrr.2023-0032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) is a common and incapacitating condition affecting patients with previous spine surgery in whom treatment approach can be challenging. This study aimed to summarize existing secondary studies and up-to-date randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that assess the effectiveness of available treatment options for FBSS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Systematic searches were carried out in five databases (PubMed, Cochrane, Scielo, Epistemonikos, and Google scholar) for all systematic reviews on the effectiveness of treatment options for FBSS published after 2012. Outcomes of interest were pain levels measured through visual analog scale or numeric rating scale, Oswestry Disability Index, and quality of life. Methodological and risk of bias assessments were performed with the AMSTAR-2 tool for systematic reviews and the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist for RCT. Prospective PROSPERO registration: CRD42022307609.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifteen studies, seven systematic reviews, and eight RCTs met the inclusion criteria and fulfilled the methodological quality assessment. Of the 15 included studies, 8 were on neurostimulation, 4 on adhesiolysis, 4 on epidural or intrathecal injections, and 3 on other treatment modalities. The risk of bias was low in seven studies, moderate in five, and high in three.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Based on this systematic overview and the considerable heterogeneity among studies, the FBSS therapeutic approach must be individualized. FBSS treatment should start with conservative management, considering the implementation of neurostimulation, a technique with the most robust evidence of effective results, in cases of refractory axial or neuropathic pain. As the last resource, in light of the evidence found, more invasive procedures or new surgical interventions are indicated.</p>","PeriodicalId":22253,"journal":{"name":"Spine Surgery and Related Research","volume":"1 1","pages":"143-154"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11007241/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spine Surgery and Related Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22603/ssrr.2023-0032","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) is a common and incapacitating condition affecting patients with previous spine surgery in whom treatment approach can be challenging. This study aimed to summarize existing secondary studies and up-to-date randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that assess the effectiveness of available treatment options for FBSS.

Methods: Systematic searches were carried out in five databases (PubMed, Cochrane, Scielo, Epistemonikos, and Google scholar) for all systematic reviews on the effectiveness of treatment options for FBSS published after 2012. Outcomes of interest were pain levels measured through visual analog scale or numeric rating scale, Oswestry Disability Index, and quality of life. Methodological and risk of bias assessments were performed with the AMSTAR-2 tool for systematic reviews and the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist for RCT. Prospective PROSPERO registration: CRD42022307609.

Results: Fifteen studies, seven systematic reviews, and eight RCTs met the inclusion criteria and fulfilled the methodological quality assessment. Of the 15 included studies, 8 were on neurostimulation, 4 on adhesiolysis, 4 on epidural or intrathecal injections, and 3 on other treatment modalities. The risk of bias was low in seven studies, moderate in five, and high in three.

Conclusions: Based on this systematic overview and the considerable heterogeneity among studies, the FBSS therapeutic approach must be individualized. FBSS treatment should start with conservative management, considering the implementation of neurostimulation, a technique with the most robust evidence of effective results, in cases of refractory axial or neuropathic pain. As the last resource, in light of the evidence found, more invasive procedures or new surgical interventions are indicated.

背部手术失败综合征的治疗方案:治疗干预有效性系统综述》。
背景:背部手术失败综合征(FBSS)是一种常见的致残性疾病,影响曾接受过脊柱手术的患者,其治疗方法具有挑战性。本研究旨在总结现有的二次研究和最新的随机临床试验(RCT),以评估现有治疗方案对 FBSS 的有效性:在五个数据库(PubMed、Cochrane、Scielo、Epistemonikos 和 Google scholar)中对 2012 年之后发表的所有有关 FBSS 治疗方案有效性的系统性综述进行了系统检索。研究结果包括通过视觉模拟量表或数字评分量表测量的疼痛程度、Oswestry残疾指数和生活质量。采用AMSTAR-2工具(用于系统性综述)和乔安娜-布里格斯研究所(Joanna Briggs Institute)核对表(用于RCT)对方法学和偏倚风险进行评估。前瞻性 PROSPERO 注册:CRD42022307609.Results:15项研究、7项系统综述和8项RCT符合纳入标准,并通过了方法学质量评估。在纳入的 15 项研究中,8 项涉及神经刺激,4 项涉及粘连溶解,4 项涉及硬膜外或鞘内注射,3 项涉及其他治疗方式。7项研究的偏倚风险较低,5项为中度偏倚风险,3项为高度偏倚风险:结论:基于这一系统性综述以及各研究之间存在的相当大的异质性,FBSS 治疗方法必须个体化。FBSS 治疗应从保守治疗开始,在难治性轴性疼痛或神经病理性疼痛病例中,可考虑使用神经刺激技术,该技术具有最可靠的有效证据。根据所发现的证据,作为最后的手段,可采用更具侵入性的程序或新的外科干预措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
71
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信