STUDY DESIGN: We performed a multicentric, randomized, comparative clinical trial. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive 150 mg of Tolperisone thrice daily or 8 mg of Thiocolchicoside twice daily for 7 days. PURPOSE: To assess the efficacy and tolerability of Tolperisone in comparison with Thiocolchicoside in the treatment of acute low back pain with spasm of spinal muscles. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: No head on clinical trial of Tolperisone with Thiocolchicoside is available and so this study is done. METHODS: The assessment of muscle spasm was made by measuring the finger-to-floor distance (FFD), articular excursion in degrees on performing Lasegue's maneuver and modified Schober's test. Assessment of pain on movement and spontaneous pain (pain at rest) of the lumbar spine was made with the help of visual analogue scale score. RESULTS: The improvement in articular excursion on Lasegue's maneuver was significantly greater on day 3 (p = 0.017) and day 7 (p = 0.0001) with Tolperisone as compared to Thiocolchicoside. The reduction in FFD score was greater on day 7 (p = 0.0001) with Tolperisone. However there was no significant difference in improvement in Schober's test score on day 3 (p = 0.664) and day 7 (p = 0.192). The improvement in pain score at rest and on movement was significantly greater with Tolperisone (p = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Tolperisone is an effective and well tolerated option for treatment of patients with skeletal muscle spasm associated with pain.
Colchicine ; Head ; Humans ; Low Back Pain ; Muscle Spasticity ; Muscle, Skeletal ; Muscles ; Spasm ; Spine ; Tolperisone

Methods: The RAND/University of California, Los Angeles appropriateness method was employed among an expert panel of 10 spine surgeons from four apex tertiary care centers. Vital characteristics that independently influenced treatment decisions in spinal TB were identified, and a scoring tool was formulated. Points were assigned for each component based on their severity. The cutoff scores to guide clinical management were determined from the receiver operating characteristic curve based on the retrospective records of 151 patients treated operatively or non-operatively with improved functional outcomes at the 1-year follow-up. Results: The components of the comprehensive spinal TB score (CSTS) are pain, kyphosis angle, vertebral destruction, and neurological status. A score classification of <5.5, 5.5–6.5, and >6.5 was established to guide the patient toward conservative, conservative/ operative, and operative management, respectively. Conclusions The CSTS was designed to reflect the essential indicators of mechanical stability, neurological stability, and disease process stabilization in spinal TB. The scoring tool is devised to be practical and serve as a common language in the spine community to facilitate discussions and decision-making in thoracolumbar spinal TB. The validity, reliability, and reproducibility of this tool must be assessed through multicenter long-term studies.