These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Systematic Review of Outcomes Following 10-Year Mark of Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial for Intervertebral Disc Herniation.
    Author: Oster BA, Kikanloo SR, Levine NL, Lian J, Cho W.
    Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2020 Jun 15; 45(12):825-831. PubMed ID: 32004232.
    Abstract:
    UNLABELLED: MINI: We summarized the 10-year outcomes of Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial for intervertebral disc herniation through a systematic review. The observational cohort 2-year analysis and the as-treated analysis of the randomized control trial at 4 and 8 years showed statistically greater improvements in those patients who were treated surgically. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a comprehensive search of Pubmed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE for English-language studies of all levels of evidence pertaining to SPORT, in accordance with Preferred Reported Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. OBJECTIVE: We aim to summarize the 10-year clinical outcomes of SPORT and its numerous follow-up studies for intervertebral disc herniation. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT) was a landmark study. SPORT compared surgical and nonoperative management of the three most common spinal pathologies. METHODS: Keywords utilized included: SPORT, spine patient outcomes research trial, disc herniation, and surgical outcomes. RESULTS: The observational cohort analysis revealed statically greater improvement in primary outcomes at 3 months and 2 years in patients who had surgery, while analysis of the randomized control trial cohort failed to show a significant difference based on the intent-to-treat principle due to significant patient crossover. However, 4 year and 8 year as-treated analysis showed statistically greater improvements in those patients who were treated surgically. SPORT's subgroup analysis evaluated important factors when considering the treatment of IDH, including patient characteristics, level of herniation, duration of symptoms, recurrence of pain, presence of retrolistheiss, patient functional status, effects of previous treatment with epidural steroid injections and opioid medication, outcomes after incidental durotomy, MRI reader reliability, reoperation rates, and risk factors for reoperation. The clinical impact of SPORT was also investigated and included comparison of SPORT patients to NSQIP patients to determine generalizability, outcome differences in SPORT's surgical center sites, patient preferences, patient expectations, level of education, and effects of watching an evidence-based video. CONCLUSION: Ten years after its inception, SPORT has made strides in standardization and optimization of treatment for spinal pathologies. SPORT has provided clinicians with insight about outcomes of surgical and nonoperative treatment of IDH. Results showed significantly greater improvements in patients treated surgically. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3. We performed a comprehensive search of Pubmed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE for English-language studies of all levels of evidence pertaining to SPORT, in accordance with Preferred Reported Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We aim to summarize the 10-year clinical outcomes of SPORT and its numerous follow-up studies for intervertebral disc herniation. The Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT) was a landmark study. SPORT compared surgical and nonoperative management of the three most common spinal pathologies. Keywords utilized included: SPORT, spine patient outcomes research trial, disc herniation, and surgical outcomes. The observational cohort analysis revealed statically greater improvement in primary outcomes at 3 months and 2 years in patients who had surgery, while analysis of the randomized control trial cohort failed to show a significant difference based on the intent-to-treat principle due to significant patient crossover. However, 4 year and 8 year as-treated analysis showed statistically greater improvements in those patients who were treated surgically. SPORT's subgroup analysis evaluated important factors when considering the treatment of IDH, including patient characteristics, level of herniation, duration of symptoms, recurrence of pain, presence of retrolistheiss, patient functional status, effects of previous treatment with epidural steroid injections and opioid medication, outcomes after incidental durotomy, MRI reader reliability, reoperation rates, and risk factors for reoperation. The clinical impact of SPORT was also investigated and included comparison of SPORT patients to NSQIP patients to determine generalizability, outcome differences in SPORT's surgical center sites, patient preferences, patient expectations, level of education, and effects of watching an evidence-based video. Ten years after its inception, SPORT has made strides in standardization and optimization of treatment for spinal pathologies. SPORT has provided clinicians with insight about outcomes of surgical and nonoperative treatment of IDH. Results showed significantly greater improvements in patients treated surgically. Level of Evidence: 3.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]