Abstract
Objectives: Several studies have demonstrated the advantages of epiduroscopy versus conservative therapies for low back pain with few studies evaluating the results in operated and non-operated back patients. We compared the effects and complications of epiduroscopy between these patients.
Patients and methods: A multi-institutional, prospective, clinical study was performed in 183 patients whose low back and leg pain had failed to respond to conservative therapies. Patients were divided into an operated back (Op) group and a non-operated (Non-op) group. Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score, the Japanese version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (JRMDQ) scores, and 100-mm visual analogue scales (VAS) for leg pain, leg numbness, low back pain and dissatisfaction with ADL were recorded before and at 1 month and 3 months after epiduroscopy.
Results: All scores significantly improved at 1 month and 3 months after epiduroscopy in both groups. JOA scores in the Non-op group were significantly higher than those in the Op group at 1 month and 3 months; JRMDQ scores in the Non-op group were significantly lower than those in the Op group at 1 month. VAS grades in the Non-op group were significantly lower than those in the Op group for leg pain and low back pain at 1 month and 3 months, and for leg numbness and dissatisfaction with ADL at 1 month. No permanent complications were observed in either group.
Conclusions: Epiduroscopy may be effective in operated and non-operated back patients with intractable low back and leg pain, although effects and complications differed between the two groups in this study.