Internal disc disruption: Difference between revisions

No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(36 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
<div class="noeditbox">Welcome to [[Vrije Universiteit Brussel Evidence-based Practice Project|Vrije Universiteit Brussel's Evidence-based Practice project]]. This space was created by and for the students in the Rehabilitation Sciences and Physiotherapy program of the Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium. Please do not edit unless you are involved in this project, but please come back in the near future to check out new information!!</div> <div class="editorbox">
<div class="editorbox"> '''Original Editor '''- [[User:Alexander Chan |Alexander Chan ]] '''Top Contributors''' - {{Special:Contributors/{{FULLPAGENAME}}}}</div>
'''Original Editors '''
<div class="editorbox">


'''Lead Editors''' - Your name will be added here if you are a lead editor on this page.&nbsp; [[Physiopedia:Editors|Read more.]]
</div>  
</div>  
== Search Strategy  ==
== Introduction ==
[[File:Internal disc disruption.png|alt=|thumb|IDD with radial fissure, no change in annulus from outer surface]]
Internal disc disruption (IDD) is a common cause of disabling low back pain (LBP) in young, healthy adults. Internal disc disruption is a distortion of the nucleus pulposus, with annular fissures, without developing [[Disc Herniation|disc herniation]].<ref name="p6" />


PubMed:<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; • Internal disc disruption<br>Web of knowledge:<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; • Internal disc disruption<br>No language restrictions were made, but only English articles have been used.<br>Google Books:<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; • Internal disc disruption<br><br>
# The radial fissure extend from the nucleus to annulus causing annular tearing and irritation of the free nerve endings
 
# If it reaches the outer third of the annulus fibrosis, the radial fissure stimulate chemical and mechanoreceptors causing pain<ref name=":0">Simon J, McAuliffe M, Shamim F, Vuong N, Tahaei A. Discogenic low back pain. Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Clinics. 2014 May 1;25(2):305-17.</ref>.  
== Definition/Description  ==
'''Clinically Relevant Anatomy:''' Click on the link for more specific details about [http://www.physio-pedia.com/index.php/Intervertebral_disc intervertebral disc] and [[Biomechanics of Lumbar Intervertebral Disc Herniation]]
 
It is assumed that Internal Disc Disruption (IDD) is an important cause of low back pain<ref name="1">Schwarzer A.C., Aprill C.N., Derby R. et al. The prevalence and clinical features of internal disc disruption in patients with chronic low back pain. Spine 1195;20:1878-1883. Level of evidence: B</ref>. Crock<ref name="2">Crock H.V. Internal disc disruption. A challenge to disc prolapse fifty years on. Spine 1986; 22:650-3 Level of evidence: C</ref> defined that the affected disc in IDD is rendered painful by changes in its internal structure, while its external appearance remains&nbsp; normal. In particular he reported annular fissures that distort the internal architecture of the disc while the disc externally appears intact and undeformed. This forms the major difference between IDD and disc herniation, which shows a true disruption of the external structure. IDD is not the same as disc degeneration. It’s a condition in which you can speak of a degeneration of the matrix of the nucleus pulposus with radial fissures that penetrate the annulus fibrosus but do not reach the outer lamella<ref name="3">DePalma M.J. iSpine – Evidence-Based Interventional Spine Care. New York: Demos Medical Publishing: 2011. Level of evidence: D</ref>.&nbsp; <br>IDD of the lumbar intervertebral disc is often overlooked as possible diagnosis in chronic low back pain<ref name="4">Sehgal N., Fortin J.D. Internal Disc Disruption and Low Back Pain. Pain Physician 2000; 2(3): 1143-157. Level of evidence: A2</ref>.
 
== Clinically Relevant Anatomy ==
 
Click on the link for more specific details about [http://www.physio-pedia.com/index.php/Intervertebral_disc intervertebral disc].


== Epidemiology /Etiology  ==
== Epidemiology /Etiology  ==
[[File:Allan foto4.jpg|right|frameless|485x485px]]
Internal disc disruption is a subgroup of [[Lumbar Discogenic Pain|discogenic pain]].


Chronic low back pain is the major cause of work-related disability in people under age 45. Only a few of these patients (&lt; 15%) has a discus herniation, which compromise a nerve-root. The majority of this population (85%) suffers from non-neurological back pain and a significant proportion of these patients are assumed to be related to musculoligamentous injury or degenerative changes. Internal disc disruption is a common entity. <br>
Repetitive shearing, axial load, and disc compression is believed to be related to the development of fissure, this leads to vertebral endplate fracture where the fissures can develop containing nuclear material of the degraded disc. This could initiate an autoimmune response.<ref name="p2">Crock, H.V., A reappraisal of intervertebral disc lesions. Med J Aust, 1970. 1(20): p. 983-9.</ref>


30% to 50% of people with chronic low back pain become an IDD diagnosis. In principle, any structure in the spine can be a possible source of pain because it is innervated (rich innervation of the outer third of the annulus fibrosus, extended nerve fibers in the middle third of the annulus<ref name="1" />)<ref name="5">DePalma M.J., Ketchum J.., Saullo T. What Is the Source of Chronic Low Back Pain and Does Age Play a Role? Pain Medicine 2011; 12: 224–233 Leve of evidence: B</ref>.<br><br>
The prevalence of IDD has been estimated to be 39% (95% CI: 29% to 49%) in ninety-two patients with chronic LBP.<ref name="p3">Schwarzer, A.C., et al., The prevalence and clinical features of internal disc disruption in patients with chronic low back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 1995. 20(17): p. 1878-83.</ref>&nbsp;In a more recent study, it has been estimated at 42% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 35% to 49%).<ref name="p4">DePalma, M.J., J.M. Ketchum, and T. Saullo, What is the source of chronic low back pain and does age play a role? Pain Med, 2011. 12(2): p. 224-33.</ref>&nbsp;


== Characteristics/Clinical Presentation<ref name="4" /> ==
== Classification of IDD ==
{| class="wikitable"
!Grades
!Description<ref>https://freinlazzara.medicalillustration.com/generateexhibit.php?ID=3102&ExhibitKeywordsRaw=&TL=&A=</ref>
|-
|grade 1
|Early annular tear extends to the inner third of the disc
|-
|grade 2
|More annular tear extends to middle third
|-
|grade 3
|The tear extends to the outer third of the disc
|-
|grade 4
|The same as grade 3 + circumferential spread in the outer third 
|}
This classification according to the modified Dallas Discograme Scale. Where Grade 0 is the normal disc. Often grade 1, 2 don't associate with pain, and grade 3, 4 presented with pain.  <ref>Aprill C, Bogduk N. High-intensity zone: a diagnostic sign of painful lumbar disc on magnetic resonance imaging. The British journal of radiology. 1992 May;65(773):361-9.</ref><ref>Vanharanta H, Sachs BL, Spivey MA, Guyer RD, Hochschuler SH, Rashbaum RF, Johnson RG, Ohnmeiss D, Mooney V. The relationship of pain provocation to lumbar disc deterioration as seen by CT/discography. Spine. 1987 Apr;12(3):295-8.</ref>


Most patients experience:<br>- Diffuse, dull ache <br>- Deep-seated, burning, lancinating pain in the back<br>- Movements in the lumbar s pine are slow<br>- Movements in the lumbar spine are guarded and restricted
== Characteristics/Clinical Presentation  ==
The ideal patient symptoms will present with central low back pain without radiation or minimal radiation to one or both limbs describe the pain as it's deep dull aching pain decreases with extension or lying flat. Sitting, driving, twisting, flexion, coughing, and [[Valsalva Test|Valsalva]] test aggravate symptoms<ref name=":0" />.


Some patients experience:<br>- Sensation of weak, unstable back<br>- Referral pain in hips and lower limbs (not uncommon)
'''In the IASP’s Classification of Chronic Pain, IDD has the features of:'''


Acute cases:<br>Earlier lifting movements with trauma are the cause of the back pain.<br>Further on, lumbar fusion is de second most common cause of low back pain<ref>DePalma M.J., Ketchum J.M., Saullo T.R. Etiology of Chronic Low Back Pain in Patients Having Undergone Lumbar Fusion. Pain Medicine 2011 APR 11; 12(5): 732-739. Level of evidence: B</ref>.
*Lumbar spinal pain, with or without referred pain in the lower limb girdle or lower limb;
*Aggravated by movements that stress the symptomatic disk<ref name="p1">IASP Taxonomy Working Group, Classification of Chronic Pain: Descriptions of Chronic Pain Syndromes and Definitions of Pain Terms, 2011.</ref>


Chronic stage:<br>Pain and muscle spasm are less striking and dramatic<br>
'''According to Sehgal (2000), most of the patient’s experience:'''
 
In general: nondescript pain and a negative physical examination in a severely apprehensive patient is the most common clinical scenario.<br>


*Diffuse, dull ache
*a deep-seated, burning, lancinating pain in the back
*Sensation of a weak, unstable back
*Referral of pain into the hips and lower limbs is not uncommon.
*a varying degree of sitting intolerance
*Lumbar spine movements are slow, guarded and restricted
*History of lifting trauma precedes the back pain in acute cases
*Pain and muscle spasm are less dramatic and more nondescript in persistent cases<ref name="p6">Sehgal, N. and J.D. Fortin, Internal disc disruption and low back pain. Pain Physician, 2000. 3(2): p. 143-157</ref>
== Differential Diagnosis  ==
== Differential Diagnosis  ==
[[File:Annular-bulge-disc-rev.jpg|thumb|269x269px|Grade 1 disc herniation]]


- <u>Disc herniation:<br></u>In which the herniated nucleus pulposus is capable of generating back/leg pain when it causes a mechanical&nbsp; compression of the nerve-root.  
* [http://www.physio-pedia.com/index.php/Disc_Herniaton '''Disc herniation'''] 
 
* '''Ruptured disc'''
<br><u>- Ruptured disc:<br></u>Fernston observed that a simple, ruptured disc without herniation can have a clinical presentation similar to herniated nucleus pulposus<ref>Sehgal N., Fortin J.D. Internal Disc Disruption and Low Back Pain. Pain Physician 2000; 2(3): 1143-157. Level of evidence: A2</ref>.<br>
* [http://www.physio-pedia.com/Degenerative_Disc_Disease '''Degenerative disc disease''']:<br>
 
== Diagnostic Procedures  ==
== Diagnostic Procedures<ref name="i" /> ==
[[File:Discography.png|thumb|Lumbar Discography]]
 
Physical examination alone is insufficient to establish a diagnosis of IDD. Diagnostic imaging, however, has contributed to the understanding of IDD.  The only convincing means to establish the diagnosis is provocation discography. Despite the clinical use of discography, its utility has been questioned due to high false positive rates.<ref name="p2" /><ref name="p4" /><ref name="p5">Crock, H., Internal disc disruption: A challange to disc prolapse fifty years on. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 1986. 11(6): p. 650-3.</ref>&nbsp;It is also associated with procedural risks, is expensive, and can be difficult to access.<ref name="p6" /> Discography has also been shown to result in accelerated disc degeneration compared to match-controls.<ref name="p7">Fernstrom, U., A discographical study of ruptured lumbar intervertebral discs. Acta Chir Scand Suppl, 1960. Suppl 258: p. 1-60.</ref>  
Pain and movement disability are two important clinical signs for IDD. Otherwise, it’s typical that radiology and CT images are normal.
* Provocative discography '''the''' '''gold standard''' for the diagnosis of [[Lumbar Discogenic Pain|lumbar discogenic pain]] it is a physiologic test that explicitly determines whether a disc is painful. The disc suspected of causing pain is injected with radiolucent dye. The aim is to provoke clinical symptoms and reveal morphological abnormalities in the annulus fibrosis.<ref name="p2" />The test is considered positive if the individual’s concordant pain is reproduced upon stimulating the suspected painful disc, and injection of adjacent discs does not reproduce the typical symptoms.<ref name="p3" />&nbsp;In asymptomatic individuals, discography is not painful, but is frequently painful in those with low back pain. A post-discography CT scan can be used to evaluate the extent of internal disruption within the disc.
 
'''The criteria for diagnosing IDD from the International Association for the Study of Pain’s Taxonomy Working Group is:'''
<br>The modern diagnostic imaging has played a role in understanding IDD. This involves the following techniques:<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; - Plain X-Ray:<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; o Usually negative
 
<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; - Computerized Tomograms:<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; o Lumbar spine and myelograms are essentially normal<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; o Low-density zones in the annular region of the intervertebral disc (high-quality routine CT scans) may suggest&nbsp; annular pathology


<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; - Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) of Lumbosacral Spine<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; o Features internal disc morphology and disc hydration (well-hydrated: bright white)
# Lumbar spinal pain, with or without referred pain in the lower limb girdle or lower limb
# Aggravated by movements that stress the symptomatic disc
# MRI or CT don't show a visible disc herniation
# Injection of the disc above or below the suspected disc mustn't elicit pain
# Diagnostic criteria for [[Lumbar Discogenic Pain|lumbar discogenic pain]] must be satisfied including either: <br>&nbsp; &nbsp; 1. Selective anesthetization of the putatively symptomatic intervertebral disc completely relieves accustomed pain, or save that whatever pain persists can be ascribed to some other coexisting source or cause<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; 2. Provocative discography of the putatively symptomatic disc reproduces the patient’s accustomed pain, but not at least two adjacent discs, and the pain cannot be ascribed to some other source innervated by the same segments as the symptomatic disc  


<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; - Lumbar Discogram/Postdiscography computerized tomography<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; o Physiologic test that explicitly determines whether a disc is painful<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;  Stimulation affected disc: reproduced pain (irrespective of the morphology)<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;  Control: stimulation of 1 or 2 other discs in which reproducing pain will fail
6. CT-discography must demonstrate a grade 3 or greater grade of annular disruption &nbsp;  


<br>The definitive diagnosis can be established, using two tests:<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; - Provocation discography which reproduces the pain<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; - CT discography to demonstrate the internal disruption (reveal grade 3 radial fissures)<br>
== Outcome Measures  ==


== Outcome Measures ==
[[Visual Analogue Scale|Visual Analogue scale VAS]]   
 
add links to outcome measures here (also see [[Outcome Measures|Outcome Measures Database]])  


== Examination  ==
== Examination  ==


It is very difficult to establish a clinical diagnosis only based on history and physical examination when there are no objective clinical findings. There is no clinical test that can make a distinction between IDD patients and patients with other conditions<ref name="i" />. The only convincing means to establish this diagnosis is provocation discography<ref>Sehgal N., Fortin J.D. Internal Disc Disruption and Low Back Pain. Pain Physician 2000; 2(3): 1143-157. Level of evidence: A2</ref>.<br>
It is very difficult to establish a clinical diagnosis only based on history and physical examination when there are no objective clinical findings. There is no clinical test that can make a distinction between IDD patients and patients with other conditions.<ref name="p3" /> The only convincing means to establish IDD is provocative discography as described above.  
 
== t<ref>Sehgal N., Fortin J.D. Internal Disc Disruption and Low Back Pain. Pain Physician 2000; 2(3): 1143-157. Level of evidence: A2</ref> <br> ==
 
1) Conservative nonsurgical treatment:<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; - Intradiscal steroid instillation<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; - Radiofrequency denervation<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; - Intradiscal Electrothermal (IDET) Therapy
 
2) Surgical treatment:<br>Internal disc disruption can be managed surgically by a fusion. It’s necessary that the surgeon identifies the affected disc. Furthermore he needs to decide the number of levels he wants to fuse, this means: fusion of the anterior interbody only or a combined anteroposterior fusion. He has to determine the necessity for instrumentation as well.<br>
 
Two important disadvantages of surgical fusion are:<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; - failure to maintain the height of the intervertebral disc<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; - less segmental motion on the fused levels<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;==&gt;&nbsp;contribute cephalocaudal neuroforaminal stenosis and overloading of adjacent disc levels<br>
 
Crock was the first in describing the anterior lumbar fusion and reported an union rate of 96% and a high return-to-work rate. The success of this management varies between 46% and 86%. <br>In 60% to 75%, good pain relief is listed. Return-to-work rate is estimated on 68% after an average period of 6 months. Common postoperative complications are: retrograde ejaculation, graft extrusion and pseudoarthrosis.<br>
 
<sub></sub>
 
== Physical Therapy Management<br> ==
 
Low back pain limits patients in their ADL-activities and their ability to work. Furthermore, it has a negative influence on the quality of life. The main goals of treatment are improving function and quality of life, treat pain and in long term, prevent future back injury and disability.<br>
 
1) Dynamic lumbar [http://www.physio-pedia.com/index.php/Spinal_Stabilization stabilization]:<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Pelvic positioning is important for postural control of the spine.<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =&gt; Achieve musculoligamentous control of lumbar lordosis in flexion and extension movements<br>3 levels in dynamic lumbar stabilization program:<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; - Basic level:<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Exercises in the supine or prone position<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; - Intermediate level:<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Exercises in kneeling and later on standing position<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; - Advanced level:<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Movements of position transition<br>=&gt;&nbsp;Each exercise has the aim to develop an isolated co-contraction muscle patterns and stabilize the lumbar spine in its neutral position (= most comfortable position for patient). A strengthening program of abdominal muscles, back extensors and pelvic stabilizers will brace the spine and helps the patient to find and maintain his neutral spine position.
 
<br>
 
2) McKenzie exercise program:<br>Some patients do not respond to the mechanical approach of the McKenzie approach such as patients with extruded disc fragments, lumbar stenosis and internal disc disruption.<br><br>
 
== Key Research  ==
 
add links and reviews of high quality evidence here (case studies should be added on new pages using the [[Template:Case Study|case study template]])<br>


== Resources <br> ==
== Medical Management ==
Most causes will respond to conservative treatment of medication, relative rest, and physical therapy intervention<ref name=":1" />&nbsp;General ladder of management:


add appropriate resources here <br>  
# Pharmacological management: Analgesic purposesand may include the use of Acetaminophen (Paracetamol), non-steroidal anti-inflammatories, muscle relaxants, or opioids.<ref name="p8">Roberts, S., et al., Histology and pathology of the human intervertebral disc. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2006. 88 Suppl 2(Supplement 2): p. 10-4.</ref>
# Minimally invasive interventional procedures: Intradiscal steroid injection; Radiofrequency denervation; Intradiscal Electrothermal (IDET) Therapy
# Surgical treatment: Internal disc disruption can be managed surgically by fusing the vertebrae at the level of disc disruption.<br>Disadvantages of surgical fusion include:<br> - Failure to maintain the height of the intervertebral disc<br> - Less segmental motion at the fused levels, which may contribute cephalocaudal neuro foraminal stenosis and overloading of adjacent disc levels&nbsp;<ref name="p6" />


== Clinical Bottom Line  ==
Most causes will respond to conservative treatment of medication, relative rest, and physical therapy intervention<ref name=":1">Raj PP. Intervertebral disc: anatomy‐physiology‐pathophysiology‐treatment. Pain Practice. 2008 Jan;8(1):18-44.</ref>
[[File:General ladder of management of intervertebral disc disease in an ideal scenario.png|center|frameless|719x719px]]


add text here <br>
== Physical Therapy Management  ==


== Recent Related Research (from [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/ Pubmed])  ==
The main goals of treatment are improving function and [[Quality of Life|quality of life]], treat pain and in long term, prevent future back injury and [[Disability-Adjusted Life Year|disability]].  


[http://www.painphysicianjournal.com/2008/october/2008;11;659-668.pdf Intradiscal Electrothermal Therapy (IDET) for the Treatment of Discogenic Low Back Pain: Patient Selection and Indications for Use]
1) [[Core Stability|Dynamic lumbar stabilisation]]:<br>Traditionally core stability has referred to the active component to the stabilizing system.                                                                                                                                 This includes local muscles that provide segmental stability (eg [[Transversus Abdominis|transversus abdominis]], [[lumbar Multifidus]]) and/or the global muscles (eg [[Rectus Abdominis|rectus abdominis]], [[Erector Spinae|erector spinae]]) that enable trunk movement/torque generation and assistance in the stability in more physically demanding tasks.<ref name="p9">Bogduk, N., Clinical anatomy of the lumbar spine and sacrum. 4th ed. 2005, New York: Churchill Livingstone.</ref>  
<div class="researchbox">
<rss>Feed goes here!!|charset=UTF-8|short|max=10</rss>
</div>


2) Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy ([[McKenzie Method|McKenzie Method]]) <ref name="p0">Milette, P., et al., Differentiating lumbar disc protrusions, disc bulges, and disc with normal contour but abnormal signal intensity.  Magnetic resonance imaging with discographic correlations. Spine, 1999. 24(1): p. 44-53.</ref>:<br>The McKenzie method utilizes the patient’s response to repeated lumbar movements to assess which movements reduce the individual’s most peripheral symptoms. These movements are then combined into an individualized exercise regimen.
== References  ==
== References  ==


see [[Adding References|adding references tutorial]].
<references />


&lt;references /&gt;
<br>


[[Category:Vrije_Universiteit_Brussel_Project|Template:VUB]]
[[Category:Vrije_Universiteit_Brussel_Project]]
[[Category:Lumbar Spine - Conditions]]
[[Category:Musculoskeletal/Orthopaedics]]

Latest revision as of 12:12, 1 December 2022

Introduction[edit | edit source]

IDD with radial fissure, no change in annulus from outer surface

Internal disc disruption (IDD) is a common cause of disabling low back pain (LBP) in young, healthy adults. Internal disc disruption is a distortion of the nucleus pulposus, with annular fissures, without developing disc herniation.[1]

  1. The radial fissure extend from the nucleus to annulus causing annular tearing and irritation of the free nerve endings
  2. If it reaches the outer third of the annulus fibrosis, the radial fissure stimulate chemical and mechanoreceptors causing pain[2].

Clinically Relevant Anatomy: Click on the link for more specific details about intervertebral disc and Biomechanics of Lumbar Intervertebral Disc Herniation

Epidemiology /Etiology[edit | edit source]

Allan foto4.jpg

Internal disc disruption is a subgroup of discogenic pain.

Repetitive shearing, axial load, and disc compression is believed to be related to the development of fissure, this leads to vertebral endplate fracture where the fissures can develop containing nuclear material of the degraded disc. This could initiate an autoimmune response.[3]

The prevalence of IDD has been estimated to be 39% (95% CI: 29% to 49%) in ninety-two patients with chronic LBP.[4] In a more recent study, it has been estimated at 42% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 35% to 49%).[5] 

Classification of IDD[edit | edit source]

Grades Description[6]
grade 1 Early annular tear extends to the inner third of the disc
grade 2 More annular tear extends to middle third
grade 3 The tear extends to the outer third of the disc
grade 4 The same as grade 3 + circumferential spread in the outer third

This classification according to the modified Dallas Discograme Scale. Where Grade 0 is the normal disc. Often grade 1, 2 don't associate with pain, and grade 3, 4 presented with pain. [7][8]

Characteristics/Clinical Presentation[edit | edit source]

The ideal patient symptoms will present with central low back pain without radiation or minimal radiation to one or both limbs describe the pain as it's deep dull aching pain decreases with extension or lying flat. Sitting, driving, twisting, flexion, coughing, and Valsalva test aggravate symptoms[2].

In the IASP’s Classification of Chronic Pain, IDD has the features of:

  • Lumbar spinal pain, with or without referred pain in the lower limb girdle or lower limb;
  • Aggravated by movements that stress the symptomatic disk[9]

According to Sehgal (2000), most of the patient’s experience:

  • Diffuse, dull ache
  • a deep-seated, burning, lancinating pain in the back
  • Sensation of a weak, unstable back
  • Referral of pain into the hips and lower limbs is not uncommon.
  • a varying degree of sitting intolerance
  • Lumbar spine movements are slow, guarded and restricted
  • History of lifting trauma precedes the back pain in acute cases
  • Pain and muscle spasm are less dramatic and more nondescript in persistent cases[1]

Differential Diagnosis[edit | edit source]

Grade 1 disc herniation

Diagnostic Procedures[edit | edit source]

Lumbar Discography

Physical examination alone is insufficient to establish a diagnosis of IDD. Diagnostic imaging, however, has contributed to the understanding of IDD. The only convincing means to establish the diagnosis is provocation discography. Despite the clinical use of discography, its utility has been questioned due to high false positive rates.[3][5][10] It is also associated with procedural risks, is expensive, and can be difficult to access.[1] Discography has also been shown to result in accelerated disc degeneration compared to match-controls.[11]

  • Provocative discography the gold standard for the diagnosis of lumbar discogenic pain it is a physiologic test that explicitly determines whether a disc is painful. The disc suspected of causing pain is injected with radiolucent dye. The aim is to provoke clinical symptoms and reveal morphological abnormalities in the annulus fibrosis.[3]The test is considered positive if the individual’s concordant pain is reproduced upon stimulating the suspected painful disc, and injection of adjacent discs does not reproduce the typical symptoms.[4] In asymptomatic individuals, discography is not painful, but is frequently painful in those with low back pain. A post-discography CT scan can be used to evaluate the extent of internal disruption within the disc.

The criteria for diagnosing IDD from the International Association for the Study of Pain’s Taxonomy Working Group is:

  1. Lumbar spinal pain, with or without referred pain in the lower limb girdle or lower limb
  2. Aggravated by movements that stress the symptomatic disc
  3. MRI or CT don't show a visible disc herniation
  4. Injection of the disc above or below the suspected disc mustn't elicit pain
  5. Diagnostic criteria for lumbar discogenic pain must be satisfied including either:
        1. Selective anesthetization of the putatively symptomatic intervertebral disc completely relieves accustomed pain, or save that whatever pain persists can be ascribed to some other coexisting source or cause
        2. Provocative discography of the putatively symptomatic disc reproduces the patient’s accustomed pain, but not at least two adjacent discs, and the pain cannot be ascribed to some other source innervated by the same segments as the symptomatic disc

6. CT-discography must demonstrate a grade 3 or greater grade of annular disruption  

Outcome Measures[edit | edit source]

Visual Analogue scale VAS

Examination[edit | edit source]

It is very difficult to establish a clinical diagnosis only based on history and physical examination when there are no objective clinical findings. There is no clinical test that can make a distinction between IDD patients and patients with other conditions.[4] The only convincing means to establish IDD is provocative discography as described above.

Medical Management[edit | edit source]

Most causes will respond to conservative treatment of medication, relative rest, and physical therapy intervention[12] General ladder of management:

  1. Pharmacological management: Analgesic purposesand may include the use of Acetaminophen (Paracetamol), non-steroidal anti-inflammatories, muscle relaxants, or opioids.[13]
  2. Minimally invasive interventional procedures: Intradiscal steroid injection; Radiofrequency denervation; Intradiscal Electrothermal (IDET) Therapy
  3. Surgical treatment: Internal disc disruption can be managed surgically by fusing the vertebrae at the level of disc disruption.
    Disadvantages of surgical fusion include:
    - Failure to maintain the height of the intervertebral disc
    - Less segmental motion at the fused levels, which may contribute cephalocaudal neuro foraminal stenosis and overloading of adjacent disc levels [1]

Most causes will respond to conservative treatment of medication, relative rest, and physical therapy intervention[12]

General ladder of management of intervertebral disc disease in an ideal scenario.png

Physical Therapy Management[edit | edit source]

The main goals of treatment are improving function and quality of life, treat pain and in long term, prevent future back injury and disability.

1) Dynamic lumbar stabilisation:
Traditionally core stability has referred to the active component to the stabilizing system. This includes local muscles that provide segmental stability (eg transversus abdominis, lumbar Multifidus) and/or the global muscles (eg rectus abdominis, erector spinae) that enable trunk movement/torque generation and assistance in the stability in more physically demanding tasks.[14]

2) Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (McKenzie Method) [15]:
The McKenzie method utilizes the patient’s response to repeated lumbar movements to assess which movements reduce the individual’s most peripheral symptoms. These movements are then combined into an individualized exercise regimen.

References[edit | edit source]

  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 Sehgal, N. and J.D. Fortin, Internal disc disruption and low back pain. Pain Physician, 2000. 3(2): p. 143-157
  2. 2.0 2.1 Simon J, McAuliffe M, Shamim F, Vuong N, Tahaei A. Discogenic low back pain. Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Clinics. 2014 May 1;25(2):305-17.
  3. 3.0 3.1 3.2 Crock, H.V., A reappraisal of intervertebral disc lesions. Med J Aust, 1970. 1(20): p. 983-9.
  4. 4.0 4.1 4.2 Schwarzer, A.C., et al., The prevalence and clinical features of internal disc disruption in patients with chronic low back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 1995. 20(17): p. 1878-83.
  5. 5.0 5.1 DePalma, M.J., J.M. Ketchum, and T. Saullo, What is the source of chronic low back pain and does age play a role? Pain Med, 2011. 12(2): p. 224-33.
  6. https://freinlazzara.medicalillustration.com/generateexhibit.php?ID=3102&ExhibitKeywordsRaw=&TL=&A=
  7. Aprill C, Bogduk N. High-intensity zone: a diagnostic sign of painful lumbar disc on magnetic resonance imaging. The British journal of radiology. 1992 May;65(773):361-9.
  8. Vanharanta H, Sachs BL, Spivey MA, Guyer RD, Hochschuler SH, Rashbaum RF, Johnson RG, Ohnmeiss D, Mooney V. The relationship of pain provocation to lumbar disc deterioration as seen by CT/discography. Spine. 1987 Apr;12(3):295-8.
  9. IASP Taxonomy Working Group, Classification of Chronic Pain: Descriptions of Chronic Pain Syndromes and Definitions of Pain Terms, 2011.
  10. Crock, H., Internal disc disruption: A challange to disc prolapse fifty years on. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 1986. 11(6): p. 650-3.
  11. Fernstrom, U., A discographical study of ruptured lumbar intervertebral discs. Acta Chir Scand Suppl, 1960. Suppl 258: p. 1-60.
  12. 12.0 12.1 Raj PP. Intervertebral disc: anatomy‐physiology‐pathophysiology‐treatment. Pain Practice. 2008 Jan;8(1):18-44.
  13. Roberts, S., et al., Histology and pathology of the human intervertebral disc. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2006. 88 Suppl 2(Supplement 2): p. 10-4.
  14. Bogduk, N., Clinical anatomy of the lumbar spine and sacrum. 4th ed. 2005, New York: Churchill Livingstone.
  15. Milette, P., et al., Differentiating lumbar disc protrusions, disc bulges, and disc with normal contour but abnormal signal intensity. Magnetic resonance imaging with discographic correlations. Spine, 1999. 24(1): p. 44-53.