69-year-old female complains of pain on the left buttock region, extending down towards hamstrings and towards the calf. Pain starts after two to three minutes of sitting, slowly increases, and by around 10 minutes, she feels severe pain, such that she has to lay down flat. On lying down, pain decreases and goes away in two to three minutes. Similar pain arises when she walks for one to two minutes, forcing her to lay down. History of discectomy L3, L4, L5 with screw and plate fixation. That was the T-lift surgery done one and a half years back. Following which, after two months of pain-free period, she developed pain again. And on a repeat MRI, which showed a scar tissue formation in L3, L4 region, following which trans-epidermal steroid injection was done twice in a span of five months. But the pain relief was temporary, and later she was subjected to a revision surgery. Following the revision surgery, she was pain-free for one month, after which the pain started again. On then consulted a different spine surgeon, who looked at MRIs before and after surgery, and commented that there is no issue with the surgery or with the treatment she had undergone. What she needs is rigorous physical exercise, that is strength training. So she underwent physiotherapy and strength training, which was six days a week at home by herself, and once a week supervised in the hospital. She underwent this physiotherapy for the next three months. At the end of three months, her pain has not decreased, but she was able to walk a little bit more, maybe due to increased lower body strength. But the pain, same pain is present. That is when she sits for more than five minutes, the pain increases such that she has to lay down. And that is the condition now. What can be done to treat this condition? She has osteoporosis. She has osteoporosis.
Reading File
Checking Date & Time
Finding Sources
Finding Sources
Searching PubMed
neurogenic claudication lumbar stenosis treatment
Searching PubMed
failed back surgery syndrome epidural fibrosis treatment
Reading File
Reading File
Reading File
Finding Sources
Finding Sources
Searching PubMed
spinal cord stimulation persistent spinal pain syndrome
Reading File
Finding Sources
Finding Sources
Reading Article
Reading Article
Reading File
Reading Article
I now have enough information for a thorough, structured clinical answer. Let me synthesize everything.
Clinical Analysis and Management: Post-Surgical Neurogenic Claudication / Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome Type 2
Diagnosis
This patient's presentation is a textbook case of neurogenic claudication in the setting of Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome Type 2 (PSPS-T2) — the term that has replaced "Failed Back Surgery Syndrome" (FBSS) in modern pain medicine nomenclature.
Key diagnostic features she exhibits:
- Pain in buttock → hamstring → calf (L4/L5/S1 distribution) — classic sciatic pattern
- Provoked by sitting and walking, relieved completely by lying flat — this is the hallmark of cauda equina claudication
- Gradual onset within 1–2 minutes of activity with forced recumbency
- Post-surgical course: initial relief → recurrence → epidural fibrosis on MRI → steroid injections (temporary) → revision surgery → recurrence
The second spine surgeon's observation that "there is no surgical issue" is significant — it points toward epidural fibrosis / arachnoiditis as the dominant pain generator rather than a structural mechanical problem that revision surgery can fix. Importantly, textbooks confirm: "there is no correlation between the severity of symptoms and the amount of scarring" — yet fibrosis causes pain through nerve root tethering, microvascular compromise, and CSF flow disturbance — Grainger & Allison's Diagnostic Radiology.
Why Physiotherapy Alone Has Not Worked
Three months of rigorous strength training improved walking tolerance modestly (increased muscular reserve), but the underlying neurogenic mechanism — epidural fibrosis compressing/tethering nerve roots at L3-L4 with ischemic radiculopathy upon positional loading — is not addressable by exercise alone. Exercise also increases lumbar lordosis during standing/walking, which dynamically narrows the stenotic canal, worsening claudication.
Management Options — Stepwise Approach
Given the clinical context (multiple surgeries, osteoporosis, failed steroid injections, post-surgical fibrosis, 69-year-old female), options should be stratified:
1. Optimize Positional/Mechanical Strategy (Immediate)
- Flexion-based walking aids: A walker or wheeled rollator with a slightly forward lean (the "shopping cart sign" position) increases lumbar canal diameter and should extend walking tolerance.
- Recumbent cycling replaces walking — the flexed hip/lumbar position avoids claudication while maintaining cardiovascular and muscle conditioning.
- Aquatic therapy: Buoyancy unloads the spine; forward-flexed posture in water prevents claudication. This is strongly preferred over land-based exercise in neurogenic claudication.
2. Interventional Pain Procedures
Since two rounds of translaminar epidural steroid injections gave only temporary relief, the next escalation should be:
A. Percutaneous Epidural Adhesiolysis (Racz Procedure / Epidurolysis)
- A catheter is placed under fluoroscopy into the epidural space, specifically into the area of fibrosis (confirmed by epidurography showing filling defects)
- Hypertonic saline (10%), hyaluronidase, and corticosteroid are instilled to mechanically and chemically lyse scar adhesions
- Evidence: A 2023 evidence-based review (Kogler et al., PMID 40463461) supports epidurolysis for low back pain with radiculopathy; the 2024 PSPS-T2 guidelines (van de Minkelis et al., PMID 38616347) rate this as having a higher level of evidence than conservative care
- Particularly appropriate here given documented MRI evidence of epidural fibrosis
B. Epiduroscopy (Spinal Endoscopy)
- Direct endoscopic visualization of the epidural space allows targeted mechanical adhesiolysis and drug delivery under direct vision
- Can detect fibrosis not visible on MRI
- Especially useful when standard adhesiolysis has failed or for more extensive fibrosis
C. Pulsed Radiofrequency (PRF) of Dorsal Root Ganglia (L4, L5, S1)
- Neuromodulation without ablation — modulates pain signaling at the DRG level
- Considered safe in post-surgical patients, no risk of further structural damage
- PSPS-T2 guidelines list this among the interventional options with a favorable safety profile (van de Minkelis et al., 2024)
3. Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) — Primary Recommendation for Refractory Cases
This patient has:
- Exhausted conservative treatment (PT, physiotherapy)
- Failed repeated epidural steroid injections
- Failed revision surgery
- Neuropathic leg/radicular pain pattern (sciatic distribution)
SCS is the FDA-approved treatment for FBSS/PSPS-T2 and represents the single most evidence-backed intervention for this exact scenario.
"SCS is approved as an aid in the management of failed back surgery syndrome, intractable low back and leg pain..." — Barash, Cullen & Stoelting's Clinical Anesthesia, 9e
Key points for her case:
- High-frequency SCS at 10 kHz has demonstrated superior pain relief over conventional SCS (40–130 Hz) for back and leg pain in long-term follow-up, and is paresthesia-free — Barash Clinical Anesthesia, 9e
- Burst SCS (500 Hz pulse trains) has also shown improved back and leg pain control vs tonic stimulation
- Closed-loop SCS adjusts stimulation in real time and has been shown superior to conventional stimulation
- SCS is more effective for peripheral neuropathic/radicular leg pain than pure axial back pain — this patient's leg-dominant pain pattern is a favorable predictor
- A trial (5 days to 4 weeks) is performed before permanent implant; conversion rates are 50–85%
- Osteoporosis is not a contraindication to SCS — the device sits in the epidural space, not in bone
4. Intrathecal Drug Delivery (Pain Pump)
If SCS provides insufficient relief for the axial and bilateral components:
- Intrathecal morphine or ziconotide (N-type calcium channel blocker) delivered directly to the CSF provides targeted analgesia with dramatically lower systemic doses
- Particularly valuable in elderly patients with polypharmacy concerns
- A trial of intrathecal injection is performed first before pump implantation
5. Regarding Further Surgery
The current evidence strongly argues against further spinal revision surgery:
- "The success rate [of revision surgery] decreasing to nearly half after the second surgery and declining even further after subsequent operations" — Grainger & Allison's Diagnostic Radiology
- She has already undergone primary surgery + revision; a third spinal surgery in an osteoporotic spine carries high risk of hardware failure, instability, and adjacent segment disease
- The second surgeon's assessment corroborates this — the problem is not fixable surgically
6. Osteoporosis-Specific Considerations
- Actively treat osteoporosis — this is not merely a background comorbidity. Hardware loosening, adjacent vertebral fractures (adjacent segment disease after L3-L5 fusion), and vertebral compression fractures are real risks
- DEXA scan to quantify severity
- Anti-resorptive or anabolic therapy: Bisphosphonates (alendronate, zoledronate) or teriparatide/romosozumab if very severe
- Calcium + Vitamin D optimization
- Hardware failure from osteoporosis can be a contributing pain generator — consider CT scan of instrumentation to rule out loosened screws/pseudoarthrosis
7. Pharmacological Management
- Neuropathic pain agents: Gabapentin or pregabalin (first-line for radicular neuropathic pain); duloxetine (SNRI with evidence in neuropathic pain + anti-depressant benefit)
- Topical agents: Lidocaine patches, capsaicin for localized components
- Avoid long-term NSAIDs in a 69-year-old with osteoporosis (GI and renal risk)
- Judicious low-dose opioids only if non-opioid options fail, with structured monitoring
8. Multidisciplinary Pain Program
Current evidence supports a biopsychosocial model for PSPS-T2. The 2024 Yoon et al. review (PMID 38311351) emphasizes multimodal management ranging from conservative strategies to neuromodulation. Referral to a dedicated interventional pain management center is the most appropriate next step, encompassing:
- Pain psychology / CBT for chronic pain catastrophization
- Occupational therapy for ADL adaptation
- Neuromodulation specialist evaluation (for SCS candidacy)
- Physiatrist for ongoing function optimization
Summary of Recommended Priority Steps
| Priority | Intervention | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Immediate | Flexion-based mobility aids + aquatic PT | Symptom reduction without further harm |
| Immediate | Treat osteoporosis actively | Hardware safety, fracture prevention |
| Immediate | Neuropathic pain pharmacotherapy (gabapentin/duloxetine) | Underutilized in this case |
| Short-term | Epidural adhesiolysis (Racz) ± epiduroscopy | Targets documented fibrosis directly |
| Short-term | PRF of DRG (L4/L5/S1) | Safe neuromodulation, no ablation |
| Medium-term | SCS trial (10 kHz preferred) | Highest evidence for FBSS/PSPS-T2 |
| If SCS partial | Intrathecal drug delivery | Rescue for refractory cases |
| Avoid | Further fusion/revision surgery | Evidence shows declining returns; osteoporosis adds risk |
Sources:
- Adams and Victor's Principles of Neurology, 12th Ed — Lumbar Stenosis section
- Barash, Cullen & Stoelting's Clinical Anesthesia, 9e — Spinal Cord Stimulation
- Grainger & Allison's Diagnostic Radiology — Failed Back Surgery Syndrome
- Schwartz's Principles of Surgery, 11e — Spinal Stenosis
- van de Minkelis J et al., Persistent spinal pain syndrome type 2, Pain Practice 2024 [PMID: 38616347]
- Miękisiak G, Failed Back Surgery Syndrome: No Longer a Surgeon's Defeat, Medicina 2023 [PMID: 37512066]
- Yoon JP et al., Multimodal management strategies for chronic pain after spinal surgery, Anesth Pain Med 2024 [PMID: 38311351]
There are certain earthing mats available in the market which generate some very small amount of current. We stand on to the mat or keep our exposed soles onto the mat. It's called an earthing mat. Will that help in any way for pain and to control?
Checking Date & Time
Searching PubMed
earthing grounding pain inflammation
Searching PubMed
grounding earthing health effects clinical
Searching the Web
earthing grounding mat clinical evidence pain relief scientific review
Reading Article
Reading Article
Here is a balanced, evidence-grounded assessment:
Earthing/Grounding Mats — What the Evidence Actually Says
What These Mats Do
A grounding/earthing mat is typically connected via a wire to the earth terminal of a standard wall socket (or directly to a ground rod). The mat conducts the Earth's surface electrical potential (approximately −30 to −200 mV DC, very low current in the microampere range) to the skin. The proposed mechanism is that free electrons from the Earth's surface are transferred into the body, acting as natural antioxidants that neutralize reactive oxygen species (ROS) driving inflammation.
This is conceptually distinct from the spinal cord stimulation discussed in the previous answer — the currents involved are thousands of times smaller and are passive, not targeted to neural tissue.
What the Research Shows
There is a small, emerging body of research — but it is low-quality and insufficient to make clinical recommendations.
The published studies on earthing (approximately 20–25 total across all topics) report the following findings relevant to pain and inflammation:
| Study type | Findings | Quality |
|---|---|---|
| Small RCTs / pilot studies | Reduced delayed-onset muscle soreness, lower inflammatory markers (white cell counts, cytokines) after exercise | Very small samples (n=10–20), short duration |
| Observational / case series | Reduced chronic pain, improved sleep, reduced stress | No control group, high bias |
| Systematic review (PCOM, 2022) | Insufficient evidence to conclude earthing reduces subjective pain | Could not meta-analyse due to study heterogeneity |
| Reviews (Menigoz et al. 2020, Sinatra et al. 2017) | Advocate for inclusion in integrative medicine; "intriguing evidence" | Published in alternative medicine journals; primary authors are also commercial proponents |
| Sleep RCT (2025, ScienceDirect) | Improved sleep quality and reduced stress | One RCT, sleep outcome only, not pain |
The honest summary: statistically significant effects have been reported in small studies, but no large, well-controlled RCT has confirmed a meaningful reduction in clinical pain — particularly for the kind of neuropathic/post-surgical radicular pain this patient has.
Applying This to Her Specific Condition
Her pain mechanism is mechanical-neuropathic: epidural fibrosis physically compresses and tethers nerve roots at L3–L4. The pain is triggered by positional loading that increases intraneural ischemia. This is a structural problem at the root level.
Even if earthing does have some mild systemic anti-inflammatory effect (the most biologically plausible benefit), it would have no ability to:
- Dissolve or soften epidural scar tissue
- Relieve root tethering
- Reverse the dynamic canal narrowing during standing/sitting
- Modulate the central sensitization at the dorsal horn that sustains her pain
The analogy: applying an anti-inflammatory to the skin when the inflammation is inside the spinal canal — it simply cannot reach the target.
Is It Harmful?
Practically speaking — no, it is not harmful in any meaningful clinical sense:
- The micro-currents are far below any physiological threshold for nerve or cardiac stimulation
- No adverse events have been reported in the literature
- It is inexpensive and passive
- The one genuine benefit that has modest supporting evidence is sleep quality improvement — and better sleep does reduce pain sensitivity through reduced central sensitization
However, there is one important caution for her specific situation: she has instrumented spinal hardware (screws and rods at L3–L5). There is no evidence that the micro-level currents from a grounding mat interact with spinal implants, and the current is far too low to cause galvanic corrosion or electrolysis. This is not a contraindication.
Verdict
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| Will it treat her neurogenic claudication or PSPS-T2? | No — wrong mechanism entirely |
| Will it reduce her neuropathic radicular pain? | Unlikely — no evidence for structural nerve root pathology |
| Does it have any potential benefit? | Possibly mild: better sleep, marginal systemic anti-inflammatory effect, stress reduction |
| Is it safe? | Yes |
| Should it replace or delay evidence-based treatment? | No — this is the critical point |
The bottom line: an earthing mat is safe to use and may marginally improve sleep quality (which indirectly helps pain tolerance), but it should not be expected to address the underlying pathology and must not replace or delay evaluation for spinal cord stimulation, epidural adhesiolysis, or the other interventions discussed. It sits firmly in the category of low-risk, low-evidence complementary measures — not treatment.
This is a shared conversation. Sign in to Orris to start your own chat.