BLOG ARTICLES

A New York Times article stated, “Spine fusion surgery is no better than alternative non-surgical treatments.” Unlike most operations, spinal fusion was tested in four clinical trials. The conclusion was that “surgery was no better than alternative non-surgical treatments, like supervised exercise and therapy to help patients deal with their fear of back pain”. The studies were completed by the early 2000s and should have been enough to greatly limit or stop spinal fusions, according to Dr. Richard Deyo, professor of evidence-based medicine at the Oregon Health and Sciences University. But that has not happened, according to a recent report printed

It’s no secret that low back pain is a leading cause of “unwanted” lost workdays. Low back pain is not a disease, but instead may be caused by several problems, the most common being degenerative discs.1  Degenerative discs may also lead to facet joint arthritis pain and “sciatica” nerve pain. To help pinpoint pain sources, discography was historically offered because MRIs couldn’t reliably identify pain. Discography was used to plan spine surgery, however, today spine fusions themselves are being questioned because of long-term fusion concerns. Discography was introduced in the 1940s. During discography, x-ray contrast is injected into the center

Spine Surgeons voiced fear nationwide that one of their highest paid spine procedures, spine fusions, attempting to treat degenerative disc pain, won’t be paid for by Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina. Because spine surgery lobbyists have no evidence to justify fusions, they are now being denied. Poor outcomes are causing fusions to fall under scrutiny worldwide. (Reference) Many scientific articles, including the New England Journal of Medicine, and a European Spine treatment Guideline referenced an article stating: “The tide of scientific evidence seems to go against the spinal fusions in degenerative disc disease. After decades of advances in this field, the

The Domino Effect – Facts Reported After Spinal Fusion Whether you believe in a creator or evolution, your spine’s design is perfect for moving and bending. Unfortunately, spinal fusions unnaturally connect spaces meant to move freely using metal rods, screws, or cages. Because fusions permanently immobilize spines, they eventually damage discs above and below fusions by overloading them with mechanical forces1. Thus, fusions accelerate degeneration of adjacent discs, causing the damaging domino effect 2. Research demonstrates the domino effect is caused by cervical and lumbar spinal fusions and may cause patients to need additional spine surgery3,4,5, and unfortunately, repeat surgery increases

Efforts to stop spine fusions where not indicated in states and countries are succeeding, and for good reason. A Washing Post article reviewed 125,000 fusion patient records while reporting on the recent 600% rise of spinal fusions. Experts and professional societies noted that over half of these patients should not have been treated with spinal fusions. What motivates those fusions? Surgeons who routinely fuse patients take home over one million dollars a year. They can make seven times more money performing fusions than simple laminectomies, a simple surgery that opens up a tight spine canal without using metal hardware. After recently treating

Because it’s known that spinal fusions cause irreversible damage to good discs adjacent to fusions1,2, it makes sense that spinal fusions are big contributors to the opioid epidemic. The relationship between taking opioids and spine surgery is becoming more important as fusion volumes continue rising and opioid use continues to rise.3  A respected orthopedic journal, (The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery), reported that 84% of patients who undergo even simple spine surgery, take opioids for the first time in their lives after having spine surgery.  In that study 9,990 spine surgery patients were followed. An important finding was that none of these spine patients taking opioids after spine surgery took opioids before