RESULTS The results of this review confirm and help quantify the significant differences that existed in the terminology and all the areas of diagnosis and treatment of presumed discogenic pain .
Our findings show that suspected discogenic pain , despite its extensive affirmation in the literature and enormous re sources regularly devoted to it , currently lacks clear diagnostic criteria and uniform treatment or terminology
BACKGROUND CONTEXT Pain innate to intervertebral disc , often referred to as discogenic pain , is suspected by some authors to be the major source of chronic low back and neck pain .
Current management of suspected discogenic pain lacks st and ardized diagnosis , treatment , and terminology .
PURPOSE In an attempt to determine whether patterns existed that may facilitate st and ardization of care , we sought to analyze the terminologies used and the various modes of diagnosis and treatment of suspected discogenic pain .
Lumbar Total Disc Arthroplasty Utilizing the ProDisc Prosthesis in Smokers Versus Nonsmokers: A Prospective Study With 2-Year Minimum Follow-up
Study Design . Prospect i ve nonr and omized clinical series . Objectives . To evaluate the efficacy of ProDisc lumbar artificial disc replacement ( ADR ) in smokers versus nonsmokers . Summary of Background Data . Smoking is a negative predictor in fusion surgery . To date , a prospect i ve study of the treatment of incapacitating discogenic low back pain using ADR in smokers versus nonsmokers has not been described . Methods . A prospect i ve analysis was performed on 104 patients with disabling discogenic low back pain treated with single-level lumbar ProDisc total disc arthroplasty . Smokers and nonsmokers were assessed before surgery and after surgery using patient satisfaction , Oswestry , and Visual Analog Scores . Additionally , preoperative and postoperative neurologic , radiographic , and pain medication assessment s were performed at similar postoperative intervals . Results . Oswestry , Visual Analog Scores , and patient satisfaction scores revealed statistical improvement beginning 3 months after surgery and were maintained at minimum 2-year follow-up . Patient satisfaction scores were higher in smokers ( 94 % ) than in nonsmokers ( 87 % ) at 2-year follow-up ( P = 0.07 ) . Radiographic analysis revealed an affected disc height increase from 4 mm to 13 mm ( P < 0.05 ) and an affected disc motion from 3 ° to 7 ° ( P < 0.05 ) . No cases of loosening , dislodgment , mechanical failure , infection , or fusion of the affected segment occurred . Conclusions . The results of our study indicate that smokers do equally well compared with nonsmokers  when ProDisc ADR is used in the treatment of debilitating lumbar spondylosis . Patient outcome and radiographic scores showed significant improvement compared with preoperative levels . Although not evident in our series , additional surveillance for intraoperative and postoperative vascular spasm and occlusion may be warranted in smokers
RESULTS The results of this review confirm and help quantify the significant differences that existed in the terminology and all the areas of diagnosis and treatment of presumed discogenic pain .
Our findings show that suspected discogenic pain , despite its extensive affirmation in the literature and enormous re sources regularly devoted to it , currently lacks clear diagnostic criteria and uniform treatment or terminology
BACKGROUND CONTEXT Pain innate to intervertebral disc , often referred to as discogenic pain , is suspected by some authors to be the major source of chronic low back and neck pain .
Current management of suspected discogenic pain lacks st and ardized diagnosis , treatment , and terminology .
PURPOSE In an attempt to determine whether patterns existed that may facilitate st and ardization of care , we sought to analyze the terminologies used and the various modes of diagnosis and treatment of suspected discogenic pain .