The Kemp test for lumbar facet joint pain

Author(s):  
Steven D. Waldman
2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 389-397 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zachary L McCormick ◽  
Heejung Choi ◽  
Rajiv Reddy ◽  
Raafay H Syed ◽  
Meghan Bhave ◽  
...  

Background and objectivesNo previous study has assessed the outcomes of cooled radiofrequency ablation (C-RFA) of the medial branch nerves (MBN) for the treatment of lumbar facet joint pain nor compared its effectiveness with traditional RFA (T-RFA). This study evaluated 6-month outcomes for pain, function, psychometrics, and medication usage in patients who underwent MBN C-RFA versus T-RFA for lumbar Z-joint pain.MethodsIn this blinded, prospective trial, patients with positive diagnostic MBN blocks (>75% relief) were randomized to MBN C-RFA or T-RFA. The primary outcome was the proportion of ‘responders’ (≥50% Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) reduction) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included NRS, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Patient Global Impression of Change.ResultsForty-three participants were randomized to MBN C-RFA (n=21) or T-RFA (n=22). There were no significant differences in demographic variables (p>0.05). A ≥50% NRS reduction was observed in 52% (95% CI 31% to 74%) and 44% (95% CI 22% to 69%) of participants in the C-RFA and T-RFA groups, respectively (p=0.75). A ≥15-point or ≥30% reduction in ODI score was observed in 62% (95% CI 38% to 82%) and 44% (95% CI 22% to 69%) of participants in the C-RFA and T-RFA groups, respectively (p=0.21).ConclusionsWhen using a single diagnostic block paradigm with a threshold of >75% pain reduction, both treatment with both C-RFA and T-RFA resulted in a success rate of approximately 50% when defined by both improvement in pain and physical function at 6-month follow-up. While the success rate was higher in the C-RFA group, this difference was not statistically significant.Trial registration numberNCT02478437.


2018 ◽  
Vol 126 (1) ◽  
pp. 280-288 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles A. Odonkor ◽  
Yian Chen ◽  
Peju Adekoya ◽  
Bryan J. Marascalchi ◽  
Hira Chaudhry-Richter ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 5;12 (5;9) ◽  
pp. 855-866 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti

Background: Lumbar facet joint pain is diagnosed by controlled diagnostic blocks. The accuracy of controlled diagnostic blocks has been demonstrated in multiple studies and confirmed in systematic reviews. Controlled diagnostic studies have shown an overall prevalence of lumbar facet joint pain in 31% of the patients with chronic low back pain without disc displacement or radiculitis, with an overall false-positive rate of 30% using a single diagnostic block. Study Design: An observational report of outcomes assessment. Setting: An interventional pain management practice setting in the United States. Objective: To determine the accuracy of controlled diagnostic blocks in managing lumbar facet joint pain at the end of 2 years. Methods: This study included 152 patients diagnosed with lumbar facet joint pain using controlled diagnostic blocks. The inclusion criteria was based on a positive response to diagnostic controlled comparative local anesthetic lumbar facet joint blocks. The treatment included therapeutic lumbar facet joint nerve blocks. Outcome Measures: The sustained diagnosis of lumbar facet joint pain at the end of one year and 2 years based on pain relief and functional status improvement. Results: At the end of one year 93% of the patients and at the end of 2 years 89.5% of the patients were considered to have lumbar facet joint pain. Limitations: The study is limited by its observational nature. Conclusion: Controlled diagnostic lumbar facet joint nerve blocks are valid utilizing the criteria of 80% pain relief and the ability to perform previously painful movements, with sustained diagnosis of lumbar facet joint pain in at least 89.5% of the patients at the end of a 2-year follow-up period. Key words: Chronic low back pain, lumbar facet or zygapophysial joint pain, facet joint nerve or medial branch blocks, controlled local anesthetic blocks, construct validity, diagnostic studies, diagnostic accuracy


2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Masoud Hashemi ◽  
Seyed Mohammad Jazayeri ◽  
Asadollah Saadat Niaki ◽  
Mahshid Nikooseresht ◽  
Alireza Hosseinpanah ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
pp. 204946371988689
Author(s):  
Saravanakumar Kanakarajan ◽  
Kasun Fernando ◽  
Sudhindra Dharmavaram ◽  
Helen F Galley

Objective: To evaluate the feasibility of sensory mapping of lumbar facet joint pain in patients scheduled to undergo radiofrequency (RF) denervation. Design: Prospective cohort study. Setting: University teaching hospital. Subjects: A total of 15 participants listed for RF denervation of lumbar facet joint. Method: After written informed consent, participants were recruited to the study. Participants completed a pain diagram prior to their procedure. After successful image-guided placement of RF cannulas, the sensory detection threshold using 50 Hz stimulation was obtained, followed by application of suprathreshold stimulation. Participants mapped their stimulated area in comparison to their pre-procedure pain diagram. Results: All 15 participants had previously undergone diagnostic blocks. All participants were able to report either pain or paraesthesia during suprathreshold stimulation. In total, 14 out of 15 participants reported complete coverage of their usual painful area with suprathreshold stimulation of nerves scheduled for RF denervation. In one of the participants, an area of upper lumbar pain was not covered during suprathreshold stimulation. Nearly two-thirds of the participants (n = 9), reported either pain or paraesthesia, outside their normal painful area during suprathreshold stimulation. A total of 71 nerves were scheduled for RF denervation. Sensory electrical stimulation was successfully achieved in 68 out of 71 nerves (96%). The average sensory detection threshold was found to be 0.3 V while the suprathreshold stimulation was 0.6 V. Conclusion: Lumbar facet joint pain can be mapped using suprathreshold sensory stimulation, which has the potential to introduce objectivity during RF denervation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document