A randomized, placebo-controlled trial of intradiscal electrothermal therapy for the treatment of discogenic low back pain


      Background context

      Intradiscal electrothermal therapy (IDET) is a treatment for discogenic low back pain the efficacy of which has not been rigorously tested.


      To compare the efficacy of IDET with that of a placebo treatment.

      Study design/setting

      Randomized, placebo-controlled, prospective trial.

      Patient sample

      Patients were recruited by referral and the media. No inducements were provided to any patient in order to have them participate. Of 1,360 individuals who were prepared to submit to randomization, 260 were found potentially eligible after clinical examination and 64 became eligible after discography. All had discogenic low back pain lasting longer than 6 months, with no comorbidity. Thirty-seven were allocated to IDET and 27 to sham treatment. Both groups were satisfactorily matched for demographic and clinical features.


      IDET was performed using a standard protocol, in which the posterior annulus of the painful disc was heated to 90 C. Sham therapy consisted of introducing a needle onto the disc and exposing the patient to the same visual and auditory environment as for a real procedure. Thirty-two (85%) of the patients randomized to the IDET group and 24 (89%) of those assigned to the sham group complied fully with the protocol of the study, and complete follow-up data are available for all of these patients.

      Outcome measures

      The principal outcome measures were pain and disability, assessed using a visual analog scale for pain, the Short Form (SF)-36, and the Oswestry disability scale.


      Patients in both groups exhibited improvements, but mean improvements in pain, disability and depression were significantly greater in the group treated with IDET. More patients deteriorated when subjected to sham treatment, whereas a greater proportion showed improvements in pain when treated with IDET. The number needed to treat, to achieve 75% relief of pain, was five. Whereas approximately 40% of the patients achieved greater than 50% relief of their pain, approximately 50% of the patients experienced no appreciable benefit.


      Nonspecific factors associated with the procedure account for a proportion of the apparent efficacy of IDET, but its efficacy cannot be attributed wholly to a placebo effect. The results of this trial cannot be generalized to patients who do not fit the strict inclusion criteria of this study, but IDET appears to provide worthwhile relief in a small proportion of strictly defined patients undergoing this treatment for intractable low back pain.


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to The Spine Journal
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Saal J.S
        • Saal J.A
        Management of chronic discogenic low back pain with a thermal intradiscal catheter. A preliminary report.
        Spine. 2000; 25: 382-388
        • Karasek M
        • Bogduk N
        Intradiscal electrothermal annuloplasty: percutaneous treatment of chronic discogenic low back pain.
        Techniques Reg Anesth Pain Manage. 2001; 5: 130-135
        • Saal J.S
        • Saal J.A
        Intradiscal electrothermal annuloplasty (IDET) for chronic disc disease: outcome assessment with minimum one year follow-up. Proceedings of the 14th Annual Meeting of the North American Spine Society, Chicago, October 20–23, 1999.
        North American Spine Society, Rosemont, IL1999 (75–6)
        • Saal J.A
        • Saal J.S
        Intradiscal electrothermal annuloplasty (IDET) treatment for chronic multi-level discogenic pain: prospective 1 year follow-up outcome study. Proceedings of the 14th Annual Meeting of the North American Spine Society, Chicago, October 20–23, 1999.
        North American Spine Society, Rosemont, IL1999 (78–9)
        • Derby R
        • O'Neill C
        • Berquam J.A
        • Kenderes L
        Intradiscal electrothermal therapy by catheter: 12 month follow-up.
        in: Proceedings of the 7th Annual Scientific Meeting of the International Spinal Injection Society, Las Vegas, August 1999. International Spinal Injection Society, Daly City, CA1999: 47
        • Saal J.A
        • Saal J.S
        Intradiscal electrothermal treatment for chronic discogenic low back pain. A prospective outcome study with minimum 1-year follow-up.
        Spine. 2000; 25: 2622-2627
        • Saal J.A
        • Saal J.S
        Intradiscal electrothermal treatment for chronic discogenic low back pain. Prospective outcome study with a minimum 2-year follow-up.
        Spine. 2002; 27: 966-974
        • Derby R
        • Eek B
        • Chen Y
        • O'Neill C
        • Ryan D
        Intradiscal electrothermal annuloplasty (IDET): a novel approach for treating chronic discogenic back pain.
        Neuromodulation. 2000; 3: 82-88
        • Singh V
        Intradiscal electrothermal therapy: a preliminary report.
        Pain Physician. 2000; 3: 367-373
        • Endres S.M
        • Fiedler G.A
        • Larson K.L
        Effectiveness of intradiscal electrothermal therapy in increasing function and reducing chronic low back pain in selected patients.
        Wisconsin Med J. 2002; 101: 31-34
        • Karasek M
        • Bogduk N
        Twelve-month follow-up of a controlled trial of intradiscal thermal anuloplasty for back pain due to internal disc disruption.
        Spine. 2000; 25: 2601-2607
        • Bogduk N
        • Karasek M
        Two-year follow-up of a controlled trial of intradiscal electrothermal anuloplasty for chronic low back pain resulting from internal disc disruption.
        Spine J. 2002; 2: 343-350
        • Anonymous
        Intradiscal electrothermal therapy: conflicting results, lively debate.
        The Back Letter. 2001; 16: 140-142
        • Harden N
        Department editor's note.
        Bulletin of the American Pain Society. 2001; 11: 1
        • Carey T.S
        Point of view.
        Spine. 2002; 27: 973-974
        • Karasek M
        • Carragee E.J
        • Schofferman J
        Intradiscal electrothermal therapy.
        SpineLine. 2002; March/April: 12-118
        • Heary R.F
        Intradiscal electrothermal annuloplasty: the IDET procedure.
        J Spinal Dis. 2001; 14: 353-360
        • The Standards of Reporting Trials Group
        A proposal for structured reporting of randomized controlled trials.
        JAMA. 1994; 272: 1926-1931
        • Koes B.W
        • Bouter L.M
        • van der Heijden G.J.M.G
        Methodological quality of randomized clinical trials on treatment efficacy in low back pain.
        Spine. 1995; 20: 228-235
        • Koes B.W
        • Scholten R.J.P.M
        • Mens J.M
        • Bouter L.M
        Efficacy of epidural steroid injections for low-back pain and sciatica: a systematic review of randomized clinical trials.
        Pain. 1995; 63: 279-288
        • Koes B.W
        • Scholten R.J.P.M
        • Mens J.M.A
        • Bouter L.M
        Efficacy of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for low back pain: a systematic review of randomized clinical trials.
        Ann Rheum Dis. 1997; 56: 214-223
        • van Tulder M.W
        • Koes B.W
        • Bouter L.M
        Conservative treatment of acute and chronic nonspecific low back pain: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials of the most common interventions.
        Spine. 1997; 22: 2128-2156
      1. Merskey H Bogduk N Classification of chronic pain. Descriptions of chronic pain syndromes and definition of pain terms. 2nd ed. IASP Press, Seattle1994
        • Endres S
        • Bogduk N
        Practice guidelines and protocols. Lumbar disc stimulation. Syllabus of the ISIS 9th Annual Scientific Meeting.
        International Spinal Injection Society, San Francisco2001 (1456–75)
      2. Digital pressure manometers. South Jordan, UT: Merit Medical Systems.

      3. SpineCath Catheters. Andover, MA: Smith and Nephew.

        • Huskisson E.C
        Measurement of pain.
        Lancet. 1974; 2: 1127-1131
        • Price D.D
        • McGrath P.A
        • Rafii A
        • Buckingham B
        The validation of visual analogue scales as ratio scale measures for chronic and experimental pain.
        Pain. 1983; 17: 45-56
        • Carlsson A.M
        Assessment of chronic pain.
        Pain. 1983; 16: 87-101
        • Chapman C.R
        • Casey K.L
        • Dubner R
        • Foley K.M
        • Gracely R.H
        • Reading A.E
        Pain measurement: an overview.
        Pain. 1985; 22: 1-31
        • Ware J.E
        • Sherbourne C.D
        The MOS 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36):.
        Med Care. 1992; 30: 473-483
        • McHornery C.A
        • Ware J.E
        • Rogers W.H
        • Raczek A.E
        • Lu J.F.R
        The validity and relative precision of MOS Short-and Long-Form Health Status Scales and Dartmouth COOP charts: results from Medical Outcomes Study.
        Med Care. 1992; 30: MS253-MS265
        • McHornery C.A
        • Ware J.E
        • Raczek A.E
        The MOS 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36):.
        Med Care. 1993; 31: 247-263
        • Fairbank J.C.T
        • Couper J
        • Davies J.B
        • et al.
        The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire.
        Physiotherapy. 1980; 72: 71-74
        • Cook R.J
        • Sackett D.L
        The number needed to treat: a clinically useful measure of treatment effect.
        Br Med J. 1995; 310: 452-454
        • Hopwood M.B
        • Manning D.E.C
        Lumbar epidural steroid injections: is a clinical trial necessary or appropriate.
        Reg Anesth Pain Med. 1999; 24: 5-7
      4. E9 statistical principles for clinical trials: missing values and outliers, Federal Register, vol. 63, no. 179, docket no. 97D-0174, section 5.3, p. 49594.