Mohan Radhakrishna

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has become the gold standard for imaging neurological tissues including the spinal cord. The use of MRI for imaging in the acute management of patients with spinal cord injury has increased significantly. This paper used a vigorous literature review with Downs and Black scoring, followed by a Delphi vote on the main conclusions. MRI is strongly recommended for the prognostication of acute spinal cord injury. The sagittal T2 sequence was particularly found to be of value. Four prognostication patterns were found to be predictive of neurological outcome (normal, single-level edema, multi-level edema, and mixed hemorrhage and edema). It is recommended that MRI be used to direct clinical decision making. MRI has a role in clearance, the ruling out of injury, of the cervical spine in the obtunded patient only if there is abnormality of the neurological exam. Patients with cervical spinal cord injuries have an increased risk of vertebral artery injuries but the literature does not allow for recommendation of magnetic resonance angiography as part of the routine protocol. Finally, time repetition (TR) and time echo (TE) values used to evaluate patients with acute spinal cord injury vary significantly. All publications with MRI should specify the TR and TE values used.

BACKGROUND: No drug treatment capable of restoring locomotor capabilities in patients suffering a motor-complete spinal cord injury (SCI) has ever been developed. We assessed the safety and efficacy of an activator of spinal locomotor neurons in humans, which were shown in paraplegic animals to elicit temporary episodes of involuntary walking. METHODS: Single administration of buspirone/levodopa/carbidopa (SpinalonTM), levodopa/carbidopa (ratio 4: 1), and buspirone or placebo was performed using a dose-escalation design in 45 subjects placed in supine position who had had an SCI classified as complete (AIS A) or motor-complete/sensory incomplete (AIS B) for at least 3 months. Blood samples before and at regular intervals (15, 30, 60, 120, 240 min) after treatment were collected for hematological and pharmacokinetic (PK) analyses. Electromyographic (EMG) activity of eight muscles (four per leg) was monitored prior to and at several time points after drug administration. RESULTS: SpinalonTM (10-35 mg buspirone/100-350 mg levodopa/25-85 mg carbidopa) displayed no sign of safety concerns - only mild nausea was found in 3 cases. At higher doses, 50 mg/500 mg/125 mg SpinalonTM was considered to have reached maximum tolerated dose (MTD) since 3 out of 4 subjects experienced related adverse events including vomiting. PK analyses showed comparable data between groups suggesting no significant drugdrug interaction with SpinalonTM. Only the SpinalonTM-treated groups displayed significant EMG activity accompanied by locomotor-like characteristics - that is with rhythmic and bilaterally alternating bursts. CONCLUSION: Therefore, this study provides evidence of safety and preliminary efficacy following a single administration of SpinalonTM in subjects with SCI.

The personal and societal impact of chronic low back pain is considerable. The intervertebral disc is considered the etiologic source in up to 40% of patients, with considerable previous efforts directed at developing reliable and efficacious treatments. Recent publications, including a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, using a one-time treatment of methylene blue, showed statistically significant, clinically relevant improvements in pain and function in the treatment groups. The postulated mechanism of action of methylene blue is denervation of small nociceptive fibers that grow into the annulus fibrosis, which are implicated in discogenic pain.Retrospective case series.Academic pain management center.To examine the outcomes for a cohort of patients treated with methylene blue for discogenic pain, discuss potential differences in selection and administration protocols and briefly review other proposed treatments for discogenic pain (e.g. intradiscal electrothermy therapy, intradiscal steroids, intradiscal biaccuplasty, rami communicans radiofrequency thermocoagulation, and chymopapain).This case series examines the pain and functional outcomes in 8 patients treated with a one-time administration of methylene blue for discogenic back pain. Follow-up information was available between 2 months and over one year, depending on the patient.Application of this treatment for these 8 patients for discogenic pain diagnosed by provocation discography showed only one clinical success at our center. Four patients had a time-limited clinical response in pain and/or function between 2 weeks and 5 months. Patient specific data are outlined in detail herein.Low back pain ascribed to a discogenic source continues to be an elusive clinical entity to treat. We have reserved further treatment of methylene blue for discogenic pain until other controlled trials have been published.A case series.

BACKGROUND: A 55-year-old male presented with severe pain and functional limitations as a result of left hip osteoarthritis. He had failed multiple treatments while waiting for a hip arthroplasty, including physical therapy, medications, and various intra-articular injections. Thermal radiofrequency lesioning of the obturator and femoral articular branches to the hip joint was offered in the interim. OBJECTIVES: To our knowledge, this is the first report to describe an inferior-lateral approach for lesioning the obturator branch, the clinical application of successive lesions to increase denervation area, and outcomes in a patient receiving a second treatment with previously good results. METHODS: To discuss relevant and technical factors for this specific case, we reviewed previous literature on hip joint radiofrequency and critically evaluated previous anatomic studies in the context of radiofrequency. RESULTS: The first treatment provided significant benefit for a period of 6 months. A second treatment was employed providing only mild to moderate benefit until his joint replacement surgery 4 months later. Literature review revealed studies of low quality secondary to small sample sizes, patient selection methodology, inclusion of patients with heterogenous etiologies for pain, variable needle placement techniques, and lack of measurement of functional outcomes. LIMITATIONS: Case report and low quality studies in existing literature. CONCLUSIONS: Hip joint radiofrequency denervation is a promising avenue for adjunctive treatment of hip pain. Further cadaveric studies are required to clarify a multitude of technical parameters. Once these are well defined, future clinical studies should consider pain, functional, and economic outcomes in their design.