Painful Schmorl’s nodes treated by discography and discoblock
- 520 Downloads
To determine the efficacy of discography and discoblock in the treatment of low back pain (LBP) associated with painful Schmorl’s nodes (SNs).
Between January 2010 and February 2015, 46 patients were studied who had LBP suspected to be secondary to SNs. There were 34 men and 12 women, and mean age was 54.2 years (range 42–68 years). All patients underwent provocation discography, and discoblock was given to positive patients (confirmed to have painful SNs). Visual analogue scores (VAS) and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were evaluated at 4 h and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months post-operatively. MRI was also used to evaluate the SNs at 12 months.
Discography was performed on a total of 60 discs without infection or other complications. Positive findings were found in 71.7% discs; 20.0% were negative, and 8.3% were indeterminate. Among the positive patients who underwent discoblock, 89.2% reported an improvement in their LBP, and none reported worsening symptoms. VAS and ODI scores decreased significantly after discoblock, and there were no significant differences between 4 h and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months post-operatively. In patients with painful SNs, the vertebral body bone marrow surrounding the SN was characterized by low T1 and high T2 signals on MRI. At 12 months, the node demonstrated either high T1 and T2 signals or low T1 and T2 signals. The SNs tended to remain stable in size over time.
Painful SNs refractory to medical or physical therapy should be an indication for treatment with discography and discoblock.
KeywordsBack pain Painful Schmorl’s node Discography Discoblock
Compliance with ethical standards
National Natural Science Foundation of China (Project No. 31270997) and Zhejiang Medical and Health Science and Technology project (Project No. 2016136915).
Conflict of interest
Each author certifies that he or she has no commercial associations (e.g., consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc.) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article.
- 1.Schmorl G (1927) Uber die an den wirbelbandscheiben vorkommenden ausdehnungs—und zerreisungsvorgange und die dadurch an ihnen und der wirbelspongiosa hervorgerufenen veranderungen. Verh Dtsch Path Ges 22:250Google Scholar
- 5.Coventry MB, Ghormley RK, Kernohan JW (1945) The intervertebral disc: its microscopic anatomy and pathology. Part I. Anatomy, development, and physiology. J Bone Jnt Surg Am 27:105–112Google Scholar
- 7.Keyes DC, Compere EL (1932) The normal and pathological physiology of the nucleus pulposus of the intervertebral disc: an anatomical, clinical, and experimental study. J Bone Jnt Surg Am 14:897–938Google Scholar
- 17.Bogduk N (1988) Acute back pain: what is the lesion? In: Proceedings of a symposium on Acute Back Pain, 2nd European Congress on back pain, Montreux, pp 6–16Google Scholar
- 19.Teraguchi M, Yoshimura N, Hashizume H, Muraki S, Yamada H, Oka H, Minamide A, Nakagawa H, Ishimoto Y, Nagata K, Kagotani R, Tanaka S, Kawaguchi H, Nakamura K, Akune T, Yoshida M (2015) The association of combination of disc degeneration, end plate signal change, and Schmorl node with low back pain in a large population study: the Wakayama Spine Study. Spine J 15(4):622–628CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 23.Derby R, Kim BJ, Lee SH, Chen Y, Seo KS, Aprill C (2005) Comparison of discographic findings in asymptomatic subject discs and the negative discs of chronic LBP patients: can discography distinguish asymptomatic discs among morphologically abnormal discs? Spine J 5:389–394CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar