Osteoarthritis of Zygapophysial Joints as a Cause of Back Pain and Neck Pain: a Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Zygapophysial joints (Z joints) can be a source of back pain and of neck pain, but the cause of pain is not known. Some authors attribute the pain to osteoarthritis but without citing evidence. OBJECTIVES: The present review was undertaken to determine if there was sufficient evidence of association between spinal pain and osteoarthritis of Z joints to justify osteoarthritis being held to be the cause of pain. The null hypothesis was that osteoarthritis of Z joints does not cause back pain or neck pain. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Relevant studies were ones that provided primary data on the association between pain and osteoarthritis of Z joints. These could be population studies, diagnostic studies, or case-control studies. SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: The database of PubMed was searched using the terms: lumbar or cervical, zygapophysial or facet, pain, and osteoarthritis or degeneration or degenerative. CHARTING METHODS: Data pertinent to the research question were extracted from original articles and tabulated for reporting. Odds ratios for associations were calculated, as were the prevalence rates of osteoarthritis in subjects with pain, and conversely the prevalence rates of pain in subjects with osteoarthritis. RESULTS: The searches retrieved 11 population studies, four diagnostic studies, and three cases control studies. No study showed any positive association between osteoarthritis of Z joints and pain. All studies found pain to be independent of the presence or severity of osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis was as common in subjects with no pain as in subjects with pain. The null hypothesis was not refuted. CONCLUSION: The published evidence does not support the belief that osteoarthritis causes Z joint pain. All the evidence contradicts this belief.

The Prevalence of "Pure" Lumbar Zygapophysial Joint Pain in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain.

BACKGROUND: Estimates of the prevalence of lumbar zygapophysial joint (Z joint) pain differ in the literature, as do case definitions for this condition. No studies have determined the prevalence of "pure" lumbar Z joint pain, defined as complete relief of pain following placebo-controlled diagnostic blocks. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to estimate the prevalence of "pure" lumbar Z joint pain. METHODS: In a private practice setting, 206 patients with possible lumbar Z joint pain underwent controlled diagnostic blocks using one of two protocols: placebo-controlled comparative blocks and fully randomized, placebo-controlled, triple blocks. RESULTS: In the combined sample, the prevalence of "pure" lumbar Z joint pain was 15% (10-20%). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of "pure" lumbar Z joint pain is substantially and significantly less than most of the prevalence estimates of lumbar Z joint pain reported in the literature.

Reopening Interventional Pain Practices during the Early Phase of the COVID-19 Global Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: Examine how interventional pain physicians navigated the early phase of reopening practices during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: In June/July 2020, Spine Intervention Society members were queried about practice demographics, perception of COVID-19 prevalence, financial impact, and implementation of new tools and procedures when re-opening practices. RESULTS: Of the 2,295 members approached, 195 (8%) completed the survey. A majority (71%) reported using risk stratification tools and changing scheduling patterns. Nearly 70% performed initial assessments via telehealth and 87% for follow-up encounters. More than 80% performed symptom/temperature checks upon in-person clinic/facility entrance, and 63% screened patients via phone. Most (58%) did not test patients for COVID-19 for office visits, while 38% tested only if symptomatic. For epidural injections, intra-articular injections, and radiofrequency neurotomy procedures, 43% reported not testing patients, while 36% tested patients only if symptomatic. Most (70%) required patients to wear a mask upon entering the clinic/facility. For nonprocedure encounters, respondents used surgical masks (85%), gloves (35%), face shields/goggles (24%), N95 respirators (15%), and gowns (6%). Some (66%) discussed unique COVID-19 risks/complications and 26% provided written information. Most did not make changes to steroid dosage (67%) or peri-procedural anticoagulation management (97%). The vast majority (81%) estimated that COVID-19 will have a moderate-severe financial impact on their practice. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 has dramatically affected interventional pain practices with regard to telehealth, in-clinic precautions, screening/testing protocols, and patient counseling. Practice patterns will continue to evolve as we learn more about the disease and improve methods to provide safe and effective care.

The Effectiveness of Lumbar Transforaminal Injection of Steroid for the Treatment of Radicular Pain: A Comprehensive Review of the Published Data.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of lumbar transforaminal injection of steroid for the treatment of radicular pain. DESIGN: Comprehensive systematic review. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome of interest was the proportion of individuals with reduction of pain by ≥50%. Additional outcomes of interest were a more-than-two-point reduction in pain score, patient satisfaction, functional improvement, decreased use of pain medication, and avoidance of spinal surgery. RESULTS: For patients with disc herniations, using the criterion of ≥50% reduction in pain, success rates across included studies (range) were 63% (58-68%) at one month, 74% (68-80%) at three months, 64% (59-69%) at six months, and 64% (57-71%) at one year. For patients with lumbar spinal stenosis, success rates across included studies (range) were 49% (43-55%) at one month, 48% (35-61%) at three months, 43% (33-53%) at six months, and 59% (45-73%) at one year, but there was a lack of corroboration from appropriately controlled studies. CONCLUSIONS: There is strong evidence that lumbar transforaminal injection of steroids is an effective treatment for radicular pain due to disc herniation. There is a lack of high-quality evidence demonstrating their effectiveness for the treatment of radicular pain due to spinal stenosis, though small studies suggest a possible benefit. Lumbar transforaminal injection of nonparticulate steroids is as effective as injections with particulate steroids.

Appropriate Use Criteria for Fluoroscopically Guided Diagnostic and Therapeutic Sacroiliac Interventions: Results from the Spine Intervention Society Convened Multispecialty Collaborative.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an overview of a multisociety effort to formulate appropriate use criteria for image-guided injections and radiofrequency procedures in the diagnosis and treatment of sacroiliac joint and posterior sacroiliac complex pain. METHODS: The Spine Intervention Society convened a multisociety effort to guide physicians and define for payers the appropriate use of image-guided injections and radiofrequency procedures. An evidence panel was established to write systematic reviews, define key terms and assumptions, and develop clinical scenarios to be addressed. The rating panel considered the evidence presented in the systematic reviews, carefully reviewed the definitions and assumptions, and rated the clinical scenarios. Final median ratings, in combination with the level of agreement, determined the final ratings for the appropriate use of sacroiliac injections and radiofrequency neurotomy. RESULTS: More than 10,000 scenarios were addressed in the appropriate use criteria and are housed within five modules in the portal, available on the Spine Intervention Society website: Module 1: Clinical Indications and Imaging; Module 2: Anticoagulants; Module 3: Timing of Injections; Module 4: Number of Injections; and Module 5: Lateral Branch Radiofrequency Neurotomy. Within several of these modules, several issues of interest are identified and discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians and payers can access the appropriate use criteria portal on the Spine Intervention Society's website and select specific clinical indications for a particular patient in order to learn more about the appropriateness of the intervention(s) under consideration.

Fluoroscopically Guided Diagnostic and Therapeutic Intra-Articular Sacroiliac Joint Injections: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the validity of fluoroscopically guided diagnostic intra-articular injections of local anesthetic and effectiveness of intra-articular steroid injections in treating sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain. DESIGN: Systematic review. INTERVENTIONS: Ten reviewers independently assessed 45 publications on diagnostic validity or effectiveness of fluoroscopically guided intra-articular SIJ injections. OUTCOME MEASURES: For diagnostic injections, the primary outcome was validity; for therapeutic injections, analgesia. Secondary outcomes were also described. RESULTS: Of 45 articles reviewed, 39 yielded diagnostic data on physical exam findings, provocation tests, and SIJ injections for diagnosing SIJ pain, and 15 addressed therapeutic effectiveness. When confirmed by comparative local anesthetic blocks with a high degree of pain relief, no single physical exam maneuver predicts response to diagnostic injections. When at least three physical exam findings are present, sensitivity, and specificity increases significantly. The prevalence of SIJ pain is likely 20-30% among patients that have suspected SIJ pain based on history and physical examination. This estimate may be higher in certain subgroups such as the elderly and fusion patients. Two randomized controlled trials and multiple observational studies supported the effectiveness of therapeutic sacroiliac joint injections. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this literature, it is unclear whether image-guided intra-articular diagnostic injections of local anesthetic predict positive responses to therapeutic agents. The overall quality of evidence is moderate for the effectiveness of therapeutic SIJ injections.

Diagnosis and treatment of posterior sacroiliac complex pain: a systematic review with comprehensive analysis of the published data.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the evidence on the validity of sacral lateral branch blocks and the effectiveness of sacral lateral branch thermal radiofrequency neurotomy in managing sacroiliac complex pain. DESIGN: Systematic review with comprehensive analysis of all published data. INTERVENTIONS: Six reviewers searched the literature on sacral lateral branch interventions. Each assessed the methodologies of studies found and the quality of the evidence presented. OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcomes assessed were diagnostic validity and effectiveness of treatment for sacroiliac complex pain. The evidence found was appraised in accordance with the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system of evaluating scientific evidence. RESULTS: The searches yielded two primary publications on sacral lateral branch blocks and 15 studies of the effectiveness of sacral lateral branch thermal radiofrequency neurotomy. One study showed multisite, multidepth sacral lateral branch blocks can anesthetize the posterior sacroiliac ligaments. Therapeutic studies show sacral lateral branch thermal radiofrequency neurotomy can relieve sacroiliac complex pain to some extent. The evidence of the validity of these blocks and the effectiveness of this treatment were rated as moderate in accordance with the GRADE system. CONCLUSIONS: The literature on sacral lateral branch interventions is sparse. One study demonstrates the face validity of multisite, multidepth sacral lateral branch blocks for diagnosis of posterior sacroiliac complex pain. Some evidence of moderate quality exists on therapeutic procedures, but it is insufficient to determine the indications and effectiveness of sacral lateral branch thermal radiofrequency neurotomy, and more research is required.

A philosophical foundation for diagnostic blocks, with criteria for their validation.

BACKGROUND: In the absence of a suitable reference standard, diagnostic local anesthetic blocks cannot be validated in the manner conventionally used for diagnostic tests. Consequently, diagnostic blocks are vulnerable to criticism for lacking validity, or being "not proven." STUDY DESIGN: Philosophical essay. METHODS: Inspired by the "viewpoints" proposed by Bradford Hill for testing cause and effect in epidemiology, a set of axiomatic criteria was developed with which the validity of diagnostic blocks could be assessed. RESULTS: Eight criteria were established: plausibility, experiment, target-specificity, effect, duration, consistency, control, and replication. Applying weighted scores to these criteria produces a metric by which the validity of a particular diagnostic block can be quantified. CONCLUSION: The eight criteria provide an axiomatic, philosophical basis for diagnostic blocks in general, and serve to show what empirical evidence needs to be gathered in order to validate a particular block. The associated metric allows the scientific evidence for different blocks to be quantified and compared.

The mild® procedure: a systematic review of the current literature.

OBJECTIVES: This study's objective was to determine if the literature supports use of the Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression (mild®) procedure (Vertos Medical, Aliso Viejo, CA, USA) to reduce pain and improve function in patients with symptomatic degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. DESIGN/SETTINGS: The study was designed as an evidence-based review of available data. Studies were identified from PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Articles were evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group system. Results were compiled assessing short- (4-6 weeks), medium- (3-6 months), and long-term (>1 year) outcomes. The primary outcomes evaluated were pain, measured by the visual analog scale (VAS), and function, measured by the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Secondary outcomes included pain and patient satisfaction, measured by the Zurich Claudication Questionnaire, adverse effects/complications, and changes in utilization of co-interventions. RESULTS: The literature search revealed one randomized controlled trial (RCT) and 12 other studies (seven prospective cohort, four retrospective, and one case series) that provided information on the use of mild® in patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. All studies showed statistically significant improvements in VAS and ODI scores at all time frames compared with preprocedure levels; the RCT showed improvement over controls. Categorical data were not provided; thus, the proportion of patients who experienced minimal clinically meaningful outcomes is unknown. CONCLUSION: The current body of evidence addressing mild® is of low quality. High-quality studies that are independent of industry funding and provide categorical data are needed to clarify the proportions of patients who benefit from mild® and the degree to which these patients benefit. Additional data at up to 2 years are needed to determine the overall utility of the procedure.

The effectiveness and risks of fluoroscopically guided cervical transforaminal injections of steroids: a systematic review with comprehensive analysis of the published data.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness and risks of fluoroscopically guided cervical transforaminal injection of corticosteroids in the treatment of radicular pain. DESIGN: Systematic review of the literature with comprehensive analysis of the published data. INTERVENTIONS: Three reviewers with formal training in evidence-based medicine searched the literature on fluoroscopically guided cervical transforaminal injection of steroids (CTFIS). Each reviewer independently assessed the methodology of studies found and appraised the quality of the evidence presented. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome assessed was relief of radicular pain. Other outcomes such as reduction in surgery rate and complications were noted if reported. The evidence on each outcome was appraised in accordance with the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system of evaluating evidence. RESULTS: The searches yielded 16 primary publications on effectiveness. Available evidence, derived mainly from observational studies, suggests that approximately 50% of patients experience 50% relief of radicular pain for at least 4 weeks after CTFIS, and the intervention may have surgery-sparing effects. The literature also contains 21 articles with primary reports of serious complications, including 13 deaths and many catastrophic neurological injuries. The evidence of pain-relieving effects, of surgery-sparing effects, and of risks of CTFIS were all rated as of very low quality according to the GRADE system. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with cervical radicular pain, fluoroscopically guided CTFIS may be effective in easing pain and reducing need for surgery. However, the evidence of effectiveness is of very low quality, and the benefits of the procedure are compromised by the risks of serious complications.

Lumbar medial branch radiofrequency neurotomy in New Zealand.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine the effectiveness of lumbar medial branch radiofrequency neurotomy (RFN) performed by two practitioners trained according to rigorous guidelines. DESIGN: Prospective, outcome study of consecutive patients with chronic back pain treated in a community setting. INTERVENTIONS: A total of 106 patients, selected on the basis of complete relief of pain following controlled, diagnostic, medial branch blocks, were treated with RFN according to the guidelines of the International Spine Intervention Society. OUTCOME MEASURES: Successful outcome was defined as complete relief of pain for at least 6 months, with complete restoration of activities of daily living, no need for any further health care, and return to work. Patients who failed to meet any of these criteria were deemed to have failed treatment. RESULTS: In the two practices, 58% and 53% of patients achieved a successful outcome. Relief lasted 15 months from the first RFN and 13 months for repeat treatments. Allowing for repeat treatment, patients maintained relief for a median duration of 17-33 months, with some 70% still having relief at follow-up. CONCLUSION: Lumbar RFN can be very effective when performed in a rigorous manner in appropriately selected patients. Chronic back pain, mediated by the lumbar medial branches, can be stopped and patients fully restored to normal living, if treated with RFN.

The effectiveness of lumbar transforaminal injection of steroids: a comprehensive review with systematic analysis of the published data.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of lumbar transforaminal injection of steroids in the treatment of radicular pain. DESIGN: Comprehensive review of the literature with systematic analysis of all published data. INTERVENTIONS: Four reviewers independently assessed 39 publications on the effectiveness of lumbar transforaminal injection of steroids. Each reviewer determined if a publication provided any valid information on effectiveness. Assessments were compared, and the data of each publication were evaluated in terms of the rigor with which they were produced and the evidence they provided of effectiveness. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome sought was the success rate for relief of pain. Improvement in secondary outcomes was noted if reported. RESULTS: For miscellaneous conditions, the available evidence is limited and is neither compelling nor conclusive. For disc herniation, the evidence is sufficiently abundant to show that lumbar transforaminal injection of steroids is not universally effective but, nevertheless, benefits a substantial proportion of patients, and is not a placebo. Success rates are higher in patients with contained herniations that cause only low-grade compression of the nerve. CONCLUSION: In a substantial proportion of patients with lumbar radicular pain caused by contained disc herniations, lumbar transforaminal injection of corticosteroids is effective in reducing pain, restoring function, reducing the need for other health care, and avoiding surgery. The evidence supporting this conclusion was revealed by comprehensive review of all published data and found to be much more compelling than it would have been if the literature review had been of the limited scope of a traditional "systematic review" of randomized, controlled trials only.

Cervical medial branch radiofrequency neurotomy in New Zealand.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the effectiveness of cervical medial branch radiofrequency neurotomy (RFN) performed by two practitioners trained according to rigorous guidelines. DESIGN: The study was designed as a prospective, outcome study of consecutive patients with chronic neck pain treated in a community setting. INTERVENTIONS: A total of 104 patients, selected on the basis of complete relief of pain following controlled, diagnostic, medial branch blocks, were treated with RFN according to the guidelines of the International Spine Intervention Society. OUTCOME MEASURES: Successful outcome was defined as complete relief of pain, or at least 80% relief, for at least 6 months, with complete restoration of activities of daily living, no need for any further health care, and return to work. Patients who failed to meet any of these criteria were deemed to have failed treatment. RESULTS: In the two practices, 74% and 61% of patients achieved a successful outcome. Relief lasted 17-20 months from the first RFN, and 15 months for repeat treatments. Allowing for repeat treatment, patients maintained relief for a median duration of 20-26 months, with some 60% still having relief at follow-up. CONCLUSION: Cervical RFN can be very effective when performed in a rigorous manner in appropriately selected patients. Chronic neck pain, mediated by the cervical medial branches, can be temporarily, but completely, relieved and patients fully restored to desired activities of daily living, if treated with RFN.

The pain of vertebral compression fractures can arise in the posterior elements.

OBJECTIVES: To describe and test a model to explain the biomechanical basis for persistent pain after compression fractures of the vertebral body. METHODS: The biomechanics model was derived axiomatically from a consideration of the anatomy of vertebral column when affected by compression fractures. Proof of principle was provided by performing controlled diagnostic blocks in six patients. RESULTS: The biomechanics model shows that the posterior elements of the vertebral column must subluxate cephalad or caudad in response to deformity of a vertebral body. The model implies that pain may arise from the posterior elements, and predicts that anesthetizing the posterior elements should relieve the pain of compression fractures. Six cases are described in which controlled medial branch blocks relieved the pain of compression fractures of thoracic or lumbar vertebral bodies. CONCLUSIONS: In some patients with vertebral compression fractures, the pain may arise from posterior elements and not the fracture itself. This phenomenon has implications for the interpretation of the outcomes of vertebroplasty in both the active and control arms of sham-controlled studies.