I regularly see patients who have been told by another doctor that they need a neck surgery to prevent the further degeneration of their cervical spine. Some of these patients are very frightened by what their doctor told them. Some were told that if their symptoms progress they could risk permanent damage to their ability to function maybe to the point of paralysis.
“I am worried if I do not get surgery my neck will get worse”
Research has strongly suggested that many patients decide on cervical fusion surgery because they fear a progression of their problem that will lead to permanent disability. However, follow-up data on patients with degenerative disease of the upper (cervical) spinal vertebrae show little or no evidence of worsening degeneration over time. Recently, doctors published findings that suggested that the majority of these patients may be stable and do not develop progression of disease or catastrophic neurologic deficits.
The researchers identified 27 patients with cervical degenerative spondylolisthesis (a slipped disc causing nerve pressure) for inclusion in their study.(1)
Here is what they found. For many of you, this terminology may sound familiar and you may recognize that your MRI included many of these terms.
- Eleven patients had cervical spondylolisthesis at C4-C5,
- Nine at C3-C4,
- Six at C5-C6,
- and one at C2-C3.
- Initially, 6 had anterolisthesis (disc forward displacement) and 21 had retrolisthesis (disc backward displacement)
- At baseline, 3 of 6 patients with anterolisthesis and 7 of 21 patients with retrolisthesis had translation of more than 2 mm on dynamic views.
- At baseline, 11 had no cervical symptoms, (This is a scenario I talk about often, MRI shows disc displacement, but the person shows no sign of pain or loss of motion. Should this person be scared into an unnecessary surgery?)
- 8 had cervicalgia (sharp neck pain that is felt in back and shoulders)
- 7 had radiculopathy (radiating pain into the elbowes and hands)
- and 1 had myelopathy. Myelopathy needs a surgical consultation as paralysis and incontinence are at risk.
Same patients, on average, seen more than three years later show limited or no progression of cervical spine disease
- At the final visit, none of the anterolistheses or retrolistheses had progressed.
- At the final visit, 7 of 10 patients with initial translation of more than 2 mm on dynamic views had no change.
- Of 17 patients with less than 2 mm of initial dynamic motion, 3 patients progressed to have more than 2 mm of dynamic translation. All 3 of these had retrolisthesis initially. None had clinical worsening of symptoms at the final visit.
CONCLUSION:
The natural history of cervical degenerative anterolisthesis and retrolisthesis seems to be stable during 2 years to nearly 8 years. Although those with retrolisthesis seem to have a higher propensity to increase their subluxation, none experienced dislocation or neurological injury.
Observation, rush to surgery NOT endorsed by researchers
Doctors at the Rothman Institute, Thomas Jefferson University and Hospitals found: “With many surgeons expanding their indications for cervical spine surgery, the number of patients being treated operatively has increased. Unfortunately, the number of patients requiring revision procedures is also increasing, but very little literature exists reviewing changes in the indications or operative planning for revision reconstruction.” (2)
What these researchers are saying in their study is that doctors have broadened the criteria for neck surgery so more can be justified. However, the literature is not keeping up with ways to help the increasing new group of failed neck surgery patients.
Compounding this is the always present rush to surgery spurred on by MRI. Doctors at Yale University suggested to doctors not to solely rely on MRI readings when evaluating patients for neck pain treatment: “Physicians should be aware of inconsistencies inherent in the interpretation of cervical MRI findings and should be aware that some findings demonstrate lower agreement than others (in recommending surgery).” (3) This agrees with the first study showing a majority of patients with clearly defined MRI abnormalities who were not at all bothered by neck pain.
Do patients rush to neck surgery because they are tired of pain medications?
The use of opioids or painkillers among people who have been suffering with long-term neck pain sufferers is significant. We see patients all the time who come into the office with a gallon size baggie of current and past medications. What is worse is that many of these prescriptions are not helpful. This is when many patients decide on the surgery. Not because of fear of worsening condition, but rather, fear of opioid addiction and the side effects.
Use of painkillers after surgery is worse
Many people get a good benefit from a cervical spine surgical procedure. Some do not. For those who did not get benefit from the surgery and their physical conditioned worsened, the need and abuse of painkillers became that much worse. Doctors publishing in the medical journal Anesthesia & Analgesia (4) warn against theses abuses of prolonged pain-killer usage after surgery. They reported “Preoperative factors, including legitimate prescribed opioid use, self-perceived risk of addiction, and depressive symptoms each independently predicted more prolonged opioid use after surgery. Each of these factors was a better predictor of prolonged opioid use than postoperative pain duration or severity.”
The investigators of the study suggested that the patients felt or knew that they would be in great pain during the surgical recovery period and that other factors including depression added to this fear. Opioid addiction came easily. The prolonged opioid use after surgery made healing at the least, difficult.
Especially among the older patients
Published in the Archives of Internal Medicine (5) researchers suggested that prescribing opioids to older patients shortly after surgery resulted in long-term analgesic use. The researchers suggested while opioids can be beneficial, they are associated with significant adverse effects such as sedation, constipation and respiratory depression, and their long-term use can lead to physiologic tolerance and addiction.
Chronic neck and back leads to problems of pain management including over-medication. If you have suffered from long-standing pain, chronic prolonged pain surgery and you want to explore ways of finding alternatives to opioid use, let’s explore the possibilities of regenerative medicine.
Stem Cell Therapy for Neck Pain
Stem cell injections
Stem cell injections involve the use of Bone Marrow derived stem cells. The stem cell treatments help restore ligament strength by causing the regeneration of ligament, tendon, cartilage and bone regeneration. Stem cell therapy can also act as an anti-inflammatory.
There is limited or no independent research on the use of stem cell therapy for treating common problems of neck pain including cervical stenosis, facet osteoarthritis, of cervical disc degenerative disease. Based on our observations we have seen patients respond well when they have a good range of motion in their neck and can move their head through the motions of chin in chest, chin in sky and facing to the left and right.
A study published in the journal Case reports in neurology (6) suggests that stem cell therapy may be effective in treating refractory chronic migraines. This was attained by injecting stem cells into the temporalis (the muscle above the ear), occipitalis (the muscle at the base of the skull), neck, and trapezius (the long muscle originating in the neck and running down into the shoulder and mid-spine) muscles. Chronic neck pain has been implicated in migraines and it is thought that by alleviating tension or pain in the neck, the migraines would also be alleviated. This is something we have seen as well a patient will have neck and migraine pain. If we treated the neck both pains would be greatly reduced or alleviated.
More research is given in my article:
Do you have questions? Ask Dr. Darrow
A leading provider of stem cell therapy, platelet rich plasma and prolotherapy
11645 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD SUITE 120, LOS ANGELES, CA 90025
PHONE: (800) 300-9300 or 310-231-7000
Stem cell and PRP injections for musculoskeletal conditions are not FDA approved. We do not treat disease. We do not offer IV treatments. There are no guarantees that this treatment will help you. Prior to our treatment, seek advice from your medical physician. Neither Dr. Darrow, nor any associate, offer medical advice from this transmission. This information is offered for educational purposes only. The transmission of this information does not create a physician-patient relationship between you and Dr. Darrow or any associate. We do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, usefulness or adequacy of any resource, information, product, or process available from this transmission. We cannot be responsible for the receipt of your email since spam filters and servers often block their receipt. If you have a medical issue, please call our office. If you have a medical emergency, please call 911.
References
1 Park MS, Moon SH, Lee HM, Kim SW, Kim TH, Suh BK, Riew KD. The natural history of degenerative spondylolisthesis of the cervical spine with 2-to 7-year follow-up. Spine. 2013 Feb 15;38(4):E205-10.
2. Helgeson MD, Albert TJ. Surgery for Failed Cervical Spine Reconstruction. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011 Nov 8. [Epub ahead of print]
3. Fu MC, Webb ML, Buerba RA, et al. Comparison of agreement of cervical spine degenerative pathology findings in magnetic resonance imaging studies. Spine J. 2016 Jan 1;16(1):42-8. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.08.026. Epub 2015 Aug 17.
4. Carroll I, Barelka P, Wang CK, et al. A Pilot Cohort Study of the Determinants of Longitudinal Opioid Use After Surgery. Anesth Analg. 2012 Jun 22.
5. Wolf MS et al (2012). Risk of unintentional overdose with non-prescription acetaminophen products. Journal of General Internal Medicine; DOI: 10.1007/s11606-012-2096-3
6 Mauskop A, Rothaus KO. Stem Cells in the Treatment of Refractory Chronic Migraines. Case Rep Neurol. 2017 Jun 14;9(2):149-155. doi: 10.1159/000477393. PubMed PMID: 28690531; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5498934.