Facet joint injection versus percutaneous kyphoplasty for mild vertebral fragility fractures: Rapid analgesia and restoration of spinal stability / 中国组织工程研究

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous kyphoplasty (PKP) for the treatment of osteoporotic compression fractures has been widely recognized in clinical practice, but clinicians are still impelled to seek for new treatment regimens due to complications such as bone cement leakage and adjacent vertebral re-fracture. OBJECTIVE: To compare the therapeutic efficacy of facet joint injection (FJI) and PKP in the treatment of mild vertebral fragility fractures. METHODS: Forty-six patients with mild vertebral fragility fractures (osteoporotic fractures) were divided into FJI group and PKP group according to the treatment regimens. The two groups of patients were treated with FJI and PKP separately based on standardized anti-osteoporosis treatment. The data of each group were recorded before and 1 week, 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after treatment. The analgesic efficacy was evaluated by visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI). Spine stability was evaluated by anterior vertebral height, kyphotic angle and lumbar spine density and the incidence of re-fracture were compared. The study protocol was implemented in line with the ethic requirements of Shanxi Bethune Hospital, Shanxi Academy of Medical Sciences in China. Informed consent was obtained from each patient. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Intragroup comparison: VAS and ODI scores of patients in both groups were significantly decreased in each period after treatment compared with the baseline (P 0.05). After treatment, the anterior vertebral body height and kyphosis angle in the PKP group were better than those in the FJI group (P 0.05). Standardized anti-osteoporosis treatment with either FJI or PKP can provide effective analgesia for patients with mild vertebral fragility fracture, and PKP has certain advantages in rapid analgesia and recovery of spinal stability.

Dolor sacroilíaco: epidemiología, fisiopatología, diagnóstico y tratamiento / Sacroiliac pain: epidemiology, physiopathology, diagnosis and treatment

El dolor sacroilíaco es una causa generalmente subdiagnosticada de dolor lumbar, que afecta del 15% a 30% de los pacientes con dolor lumbar bajo crónico no radicular. La articulación sacroilíaca (ASI) recibe continuo stress durante la bipedestación y marcha, siendo estabilizada por estructuras ligamentarias, capsulares y miofasciales fuertes, que reciben una abundante inervación. Destaca la dificultad en el diagnóstico del dolor sacroilíaco; debido a su naturaleza heterogénea. Éste se debe sospechar en todo paciente con síndrome de dolor lumbar no radicular, unilateral y no central. El examen físico debería descartar patología de cadera y columna lumbar. La realización de maniobras de provocación del dolor sacroilíaco aporta en el diagnóstico, teniendo la combinación de 3 o más maniobras positivas una sensibilidad de 85% y especificidad de 79%. Se ha recurrido a inyecciones diagnósticas con anestésicos locales, tanto intraarticulares como de ligamentos circundantes. El tratamiento del dolor sacroilíaco es multimodal e individualizado para cada paciente. El tratamiento conservador­basado en terapia física y antiinflamatorios no esteroidales­ es la terapia de primera línea. Las infiltraciones esteroidales tanto intra como extraarticulares pueden proveer alivio en un grupo de pacientes con inflamación activa. La denervación de los ramos dorsales laterales con radiofrecuencia ha mostrado ser un tratamiento exitoso en pacientes con dolor sacroilíaco, logrando 6 meses a 1 año de alivio del dolor. En pacientes con dolor refractario, la fusión de la articulación sacroilíaca es una opción, prefiriéndose la técnica mínimamente invasiva de fijación trans-sacroilíaca.

Sacroiliac pain is an frecuent underdiagnosed source of low back pain, affecting 15% to 30% of individuals with chronic, non-radicular pain. The sacroiliac joint (SIJ) is subject to continuous stress during standing position and gait, being stabilized by strong ligament, capsular and myofascial structures with rich innervation. Due to its heterogeneous nature, SIJ pain is difficult to diagnose, and it should be suspected in all patients with non-radicular unilateral and non-central low back pain syndrome. Physical examination should rule out hip and lumbar spine pathology. SIJ provocation maneuvers are used for diagnosis, with the combination of 3 or more positive maneuvers resulting in a sensitivity of 85% and a specificity of 79%. Diagnostic injections of local anesthetics, both intra-articular and in the surrounding ligaments have been used. treatment of SIJ pain is multimodal and individualized for each patient. Conservative treatment, based on physical therapy and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is the first line therapy. Both intra- and extra-articular steroid infiltrations can provide relief in a group of patients with active inflammation. Radiofrequency denervation of lateral dorsal branches has proven to be a successful treatment in SIJ pain patients, achieving 6 to 12 months of pain relief. In patients with refractory pain, SIJ fusion is an option, with minimally invasive trans-sacroiliac fixation being the preferred technique.

Unintentional lumbar facet joint injection guided by fluoroscopy during interlaminar epidural steroid injection: a retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND: An epidural steroid injection (ESI) is a commonly administered procedure in pain clinics. An unintentional lumbar facet joint injection during interlaminar ESI was reported in a previous study, but there has not been much research on the characteristics of an unintentional lumbar facet joint injection. This study illustrated the imaging features of an unintentional lumbar facet joint injection during an interlaminar ESI and analyzed characteristics of patients who underwent this injection. METHODS: From December 2015 to May 2017, we performed 662 lumbar ESIs and we identified 24 cases (21 patients) that underwent a lumbar facet joint injection. We gathered data contrast pattern, needle approach levels and directions, injected facet joint levels and directions, presence of lumbar spine disease as seen on magnetic resonance images (MRI), and histories of lumbar spine surgeries. RESULTS: The contrast pattern in the facet joint has a sigmoid or ovoid contrast pattern confined to the vicinity of the facet joint. The incidence of unintentional lumbar facet joint injection was 3.6%. The mean age was 68.47 years. Among these 21 patients, 14 (66.7%) were injected in the facet joint ipsilaterally to the needle approach. Among the 20 patients who received MRI, all (100%) had central stenosis and 15 patients (75%) had severe stenosis. CONCLUSIONS: When the operator performs an interlaminar ESI on patients with central spinal stenosis, the contrast pattern on the fluoroscopy during interlaminar ESI should be carefully examined to distinguish between the epidural space and facet joint.

Interventional rheumatology: the competence of Brazilian rheumatologists / Reumatologia intervencionista: competência dos reumatologistas brasileiros

Abstract Objectives: Describe Brazilian rheumatologists's competence in interventional rheumatology; assess the association between this ability and demographic and training variables. Methods: A cross-sectional study with 500 Brazilian rheumatologists. Participants were assessed by self-administered questionnaire consisting of demographics, training, practice in office and knowledge in interventional rheumatology data. Results: 463 participants had their data analyzed. The mean age was 40.2 years (±11.2). 70% had performed periarticular injections and 78% had performed intra-articular injections. The sample was divided into three groups: non-interventionist, little interventionist and very interventionist. The non-interventionist group showed (p < 0.001-0.04) higher mean age, lower proportion of university bond, lower training history, higher proportion of graduates in the Southeast country, and higher proportion of graduates in the 1980s to 1989. The very interventionist group showed higher (p < 0.001-0.018) proportion of adult rheumatologists, higher proportion of university bond, longer training time with greater practice of complex procedures, and higher proportion of graduates, trained and with private practice in the South country. Variables most associated with the very interventionist subgroup are performing axial intra-articular injections (OR: 7.4, p < 0.001), synovial biopsy (OR: 5.75, p = 0.043), image-guided IAI (OR: 4.16, p < 0.001), viscosupplementation (OR = 3.41, p < 0.001), joint lavage (OR = 3.22, p = 0.019), salivary gland biopsy (OR = 2.16, p = 0.034) and over 6-month training (OR: 2.16, p = 0.008). Conclusions: Performing more complex invasive procedures and over 6-month training in interventional rheumatology were variables associated with enhanced interventional profile.

Resumo Objetivos: Descrever a competência dos reumatologistas brasileiros na reumatologia intervencionista (RI); avaliar a associação entre essa capacidade e variáveis demográficas e de treinamento. Métodos: Fez-se um estudo transversal com 500 reumatologistas brasileiros. Os participantes foram avaliados por questionário autoadministrado, constituído por dados demográficos, treinamento, prática em consultório e conhecimento em dados de RI. Resultados: Analisaram-se os dados de 463 participantes. A média foi de 40,2 anos (± 11,2). Desses, 70% fizeram injeções periarticulares (IPA) e 78% intra-articulares (IIA). A amostra foi dividida em três grupos: não intervencionista, pouco intervencionista e muito intervencionista. O grupo não intervencionista apresentou (p < 0,001 - 0,04) maior média de idade, menor proporção de vínculo universitário, menor história de treinamento, maior proporção de graduados na Região Sudeste do país e maior proporção de graduados nas décadas de 1980 a 1989. O grupo muito intervencionista apresentou (p < 0,001 - 0,018) maior proporção de reumatologias que atendem pacientes adultos, maior proporção de vínculo universitário, maior tempo de treinamento de prática de procedimentos complexos, maior proporção de graduados no sul do país, treinados e com consultório particular nessa região. As variáveis mais frequentemente associadas ao subgrupo muito intervencionista foram realização de IIA axial (OR: 7,4, p < 0,001), biópsia sinovial (OR: 5,75, p = 0,043), IIA guiada por imagem (OR: 4,16, p < 0,001), viscossuplementação (OR = 3,41, p < 0,001), lavagem articular (OR = 3,22, p = 0,019), biópsia da glândula salivar (OR = 2,16, p = 0,034) e mais de seis meses de treinamento (OR: 2,16; p = 0,008). Conclusões: Fazer procedimentos invasivos mais complexos e ter mais de seis meses de treinamento em RI foram as variáveis associadas a um maior perfil intervencionista.

Ultrasound-guided glenohumeral joint injection combined with distension for treatment of frozen shoulder / 中华超声影像学杂志

Objective To detect the effectiveness of ultrasound-guided glenohumeral joint injection combined with distension for treatment of frozen shoulder.Methods Fifty-two patients diagnosed as frozen shoulder by physical and ultrasound examination were performed the ultrasound-guided glenohumeral joint injection combined with distension.Finally,48 patients completed the continuously three times'treatment were included in this study.Patients were assessed using Visual Analogy Score(VAS),the influence of sleeping and the Active Range of Motion(AROM)at the beginning of each time's treatment and at 2 weeks after the third treatment in order to compare the effectiveness of each time's treatment.Results The pain and sleeping influence of the first treatment were significantly improved compared with before treatment(all P <0.05),but the AROM was not significantly improved(P >0.05).The pain,sleeping influence and AROM of the second treatment were significantly improved by comparing with the first treatment respectively(all P <0.05).The pain and AROM of the third treatment were further improved than the second treatment(all P <0.05).However there was no significant improvement of sleeping influence for the third treatment(P >0.05).Conclusions The pain,sleeping influence and AROM of frozen shoulder patients are significantly improved after the treatment of ultrasound-guided glenohumeral joint injection combined with distension for continuous three times,which is an effective treatment for frozen shoulder.

A Randomized Comparative Study of Blind versus Ultrasound Guided Glenohumeral Joint Injection of Corticosteroids for Treatment of Shoulder Stiffness

BACKGROUND: We prospectively compared the response to blind and ultrasound-guided glenohumeral injection of corticosteroids for treatment of shoulder stiffness. METHODS: A total of 77 patients with shoulder stiffness between April 2008 and March 2012 were recruited. Patients were randomized to receive either a blind (group 1, n=39) or ultrasound-guided (group 2, n=38) glenohumeral injection of 40 mg triamcinolone. The clinical outcomes and shoulder range of motion (ROM) before injection, at 3, 6, and 12 months after injection and at the last follow-up were assessed. The same rehabilitation program was applied in both groups during the follow-up period. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in demographic data on age, sex, ROM, and symptom duration before injection between groups (p>0.05). There were no significant differences in ROM including forward flexion, external rotation at the side, external rotation at 90o abduction, and internal rotation, visual analogue scale for pain and functional outcomes including American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Simple Shoulder test between the two groups at any time point (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Based on the current data, the result of ultrasound-guided glenohumeral injection was not superior to that of blind injection in the treatment of shoulder stiffness. We suggest that ultrasound-guided glenohumeral injection could be performed according to the patient's compliance and the surgeon's preference. Once familiar with the non-imaging-guided glenohumeral injection, it is an efficient and reliable method for the experienced surgeon. Ultrasound could be performed according to the surgeon's preference.

A Randomized Comparative Study of Blind versus Ultrasound Guided Glenohumeral Joint Injection of Corticosteroids for Treatment of Shoulder Stiffness

BACKGROUND: We prospectively compared the response to blind and ultrasound-guided glenohumeral injection of corticosteroids for treatment of shoulder stiffness. METHODS: A total of 77 patients with shoulder stiffness between April 2008 and March 2012 were recruited. Patients were randomized to receive either a blind (group 1, n=39) or ultrasound-guided (group 2, n=38) glenohumeral injection of 40 mg triamcinolone. The clinical outcomes and shoulder range of motion (ROM) before injection, at 3, 6, and 12 months after injection and at the last follow-up were assessed. The same rehabilitation program was applied in both groups during the follow-up period. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in demographic data on age, sex, ROM, and symptom duration before injection between groups (p>0.05). There were no significant differences in ROM including forward flexion, external rotation at the side, external rotation at 90o abduction, and internal rotation, visual analogue scale for pain and functional outcomes including American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Simple Shoulder test between the two groups at any time point (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Based on the current data, the result of ultrasound-guided glenohumeral injection was not superior to that of blind injection in the treatment of shoulder stiffness. We suggest that ultrasound-guided glenohumeral injection could be performed according to the patient's compliance and the surgeon's preference. Once familiar with the non-imaging-guided glenohumeral injection, it is an efficient and reliable method for the experienced surgeon. Ultrasound could be performed according to the surgeon's preference.

Ultrasound Guided Shoulder Joint Injection through Rotator Cuff Interval / 대한통증학회지

BACKGROUND: Shoulder joint injection is currently performed under fluoroscopic or computed tomography scan guidance. We performed this study to determine if an ultrasound guided shoulder joint injection through rotator cuff interval would have clinical usefulness. METHODS: A total of 17 volunteers [12 women, 5 men; mean age 28 yr (23-32 yr)] received shoulder joint injection under multilinear ultrasound (5-10 MHz). Volunteers were positioned supinely on a table with their arm in a neutral position. The anterior shoulder region of the patient was sterilized using povidone iodine. A 24 gauge needle was introduced and directly visualized in real time as it passed obliquely from the skin surface to the inferior space of the biceps tendon. If there was little or no resistance to the injection, a contrast media (omnipaque) was injected and checked fluoroscopically. RESULTS: Ultrasound guided shoulder joint injection through rotator cuff interval was successful in all cases. The average time taken for the procedure was 27.5 +/- 16.5 sec. The vertical distance from skin to the inferior space of the biceps tendon was 1.6 +/- 0.4 cm and the distance of needle from the skin to the inferior space of biceps tendon was 2.8 +/- 0.6 cm. The procedure was well tolerated by all volunteers. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound guided shoulder joint injection through rotator cuff interval is an effective, rapid, and easy-to-perform injection technique. Ultrasound guided injection enables exact needle placement and avoids the use of both ionizing radiation and iodinated contrast material.

Pyogenic Arthritis and Paraspinal Abscess Following Facet Joint Steroid Injection: A Case Report / 대한척추외과학회지

STUDY DESIGN: A case report and literature review. OBJECTIVES: To discuss pyogenic infections of the facet joints and paraspinal intramuscular abscess that developed after a steroid injection into the facet joint of the lower back. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A 39-year-old man who received a steroid injection to the facet joint, 3 weeks prior to admission, experienced increasing lower back pain and a high fever. RESULTS: Plain radiographs of the lumbar spine showed osteolytic erosion of the articular process at the L3-4 facet joint. On a CT scan, the destructed facet joint was connected to a paraspinal intramuscular abscess. MR images also showed a paraspinal intramuscular abscess on multiplane views. In the operative field, the paraspinal abscess, which extended from 2nd to 5th lumbar vertebrae, was found on the right side, with the L3-4 facet destructed and directly connected to the abscess. Some chalky material, considered to be steroid crystals, was found at the L3-4 facet joint. Drainage, debridement and irrigation were performed. Staphylococcus aureus was isolated from the culture. After surgery, intravenous antibiotics were administered, and the patients' symptoms quickly resolved. CONCLUSIONS: A posterior facet joint injection has its own risks of developing a pyogenic infection of the facet joint. Pyogenic facet joint infections may progress to a paraspinal intramuscular abscess. Surgical drainage is mandatory in cases resistant to antibiotic treatment, with evidence of pus formation on imaging studies.

The Effects of Facet Joint Injection in Osteoporotic Spinal Compression Fractures

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of facet joint injection in the conservative management of osteoporotic spinal compression fractures METHOD: Among 27 patients with osteoporotic spinal compression fractures which were confirmed by plain radiography and bone densitometry (dual energy x-ray absorptiometry), 9 patients were control group and 18 patients received facet joint injection treatment. Facet joint injection of thoracolumbar spine was done under fluoroscopic guide with 1% lidocaine 1 ml and triamcinolone 10 mg at each joint above and below the level of compression fracture at both side. Main outcome measures were visual analog scale (VAS), spinal movement (modified Schober's and lateral bending test), and physical activity from bed-ridden state (grade I) to outdoor activity without pain (grade V). The treatment outcomes were assessed before injection, 2 weeks and 4 weeks after injection. RESULTS: There were significant decrease in VAS at 2 weeks and 4 weeks after injection in the study group (p<0.05). Physical activity was significantly improved at post injection 2 weeks and 4 weeks (p<0.05). There were no significant differences between the two groups in spinal movement. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that facet joint injection of thoracolumbar spine is useful method in the conservative management of painful osteoporotic compression fractures.

Clinical Evaluation of the Intra / 대한정형외과학회잡지

Since the term “facet syndrome” was introduced by Ghormley in 1933, arthropathy of the lumbar facet joint has long been recognized as an important source of low back pain, even sciatic pain. And facet joint injection has been helpful in the diagnosis and therapy for this facet syndrome. However, considering the possible complications such as infection, neurologic deficit and difficulty in locating the symptpmatic joint, and placebo effect, we have frequently doubted about clinical application of these procedures. This study is a retrospective review of 18 patients who got lumber facet joint injection for low back and leg pain with various previous indication that are not response to convential therapy for 2 months or more for therapeutic purpose. The response to facet joint injection was analyzed according to the entire spectrum of symptoms, physical findings, and X-ray findings. 13 or 15 patients with back pain with thigh or groin pain aggrevated by extension/rotation of trunk had successful response but patients with leg pain below the knee joint or pathology in the other structures in the spine got poor response. Strict diagnostic criteria through scoring system, provocation test, relief test and analysis of patient's signs and symptoms is needed to get higher degree of predictability and effectiveness of facet joint injection.