scholarly journals A Systematic Review and Best Evidence Synthesis of Effectiveness of Therapeutic Facet Joint Interventions in Managing Chronic Spinal Pain

2015 ◽  
Vol 18;4 (4;18) ◽  
pp. E535-E582 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Facet Joint ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
Nerve Blocks ◽  
Radiofrequency Neurotomy ◽  
Level Ii ◽  
Interventional Pain Management ◽  
Facet Joint Interventions ◽  
Chronic Spinal Pain

Background: The therapeutic spinal facet joint interventions generally used for the treatment of axial spinal pain of facet joint origin are intraarticular facet joint injections, facet joint nerve blocks, and radiofrequency neurotomy. Despite interventional procedures being common as treatment strategies for facet joint pathology, there is a paucity of literature investigating these therapeutic approaches. Systematic reviews assessing the effectiveness of various therapeutic facet joint interventions have shown there to be variable evidence based on the region and the modality of treatment utilized. Overall, the evidence ranges from limited to moderate. Objective: To evaluate and update the clinical utility of therapeutic lumbar, cervical, and thoracic facet joint interventions in managing chronic spinal pain. Study Design: A systematic review of therapeutic lumbar, cervical, and thoracic facet joint interventions for the treatment of chronic spinal pain. Methods: The available literature on lumbar, cervical, and thoracic facet joint interventions in managing chronic spinal pain was reviewed. The quality assessment criteria utilized were the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group criteria and Interventional Pain Management Techniques – Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment (IPM – QRB) for randomized trials and Interventional Pain Management Techniques – Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment for Nonrandomized Studies (IPM – QRBNR) for observational studies. The level of evidence was classified at 5 levels from Level I to Level V. Data sources included relevant literature identified through searches on PubMed and EMBASE from 1966 through March 2015, and manual searches of the bibliographies of known primary and review articles. Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measure was pain relief (short-term relief = up to 6 months and long-term > 6 months). Secondary outcome measures were improvement in functional status, psychological status, return to work, and reduction in opioid intake consumption. Results: A total of 21 randomized controlled trials meeting appropriate inclusion criteria were assessed in this evaluation. A total of 5 observational studies were assessed. In the lumbar spine, for long-term effectiveness, there is Level II evidence for radiofrequency neurotomy and lumbar facet joint nerve blocks, whereas the evidence is Level III for lumbosacral intraarticular injections. In the cervical spine, for long-term improvement, there is Level II evidence for cervical radiofrequency neurotomy and cervical facet joint nerve blocks, and Level IV evidence for cervical intraarticular injections. In the thoracic spine there is Level II evidence for thoracic facet joint nerve blocks and Level IV evidence for radiofrequency neurotomy for long-term improvement. Limitations: The limitations of this systematic review include an overall paucity of high quality studies and more specifically the lack of investigations related to thoracic facet joint injections. Conclusion: Based on the present assessment for the management of spinal facet joint pain, the evidence for long-term improvement is Level II for lumbar and cervical radiofrequency neurotomy, and therapeutic facet joint nerve blocks in the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine; Level III for lumbar intraarticular injections; and Level IV for cervical intraarticular injections and thoracic radiofrequency neurotomy. Key Words: Spinal pain, chronic low back pain, chronic neck pain, chronic thoracic pain, intraarticular facet joint blocks, facet joint nerve blocks, conventional radiofrequency neurotomy, pulsed radiofrequency neurolysis

scholarly journals An Update of Comprehensive Evidence-Based Guidelines for Interventional Techniques in Chronic Spinal Pain. Part II: Guidance and Recommendations

2013 ◽  
Vol 2s;16 (2s;4) ◽  
pp. S49-S283
Author(s):  
ASIPP ASIPP
Keyword(s):  
Antiplatelet Therapy ◽  
Facet Joint ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
Nerve Blocks ◽  
Interventional Techniques ◽  
Epidural Injections ◽  
Radiofrequency Neurotomy ◽  
Good For ◽  
Facet Joint Interventions ◽  
Chronic Spinal Pain

Objective: To develop evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for interventional techniques in the diagnosis and treatment of chronic spinal pain. Methodology: Systematic assessment of the literature. Evidence: I. Lumbar Spine • The evidence for accuracy of diagnostic selective nerve root blocks is limited; whereas for lumbar provocation discography, it is fair. • The evidence for diagnostic lumbar facet joint nerve blocks and diagnostic sacroiliac intraarticular injections is good with 75% to 100% pain relief as criterion standard with controlled local anesthetic or placebo blocks. • The evidence is good in managing disc herniation or radiculitis for caudal, interlaminar, and transforaminal epidural injections; fair for axial or discogenic pain without disc herniation, radiculitis or facet joint pain with caudal, and interlaminar epidural injections, and limited for transforaminal epidural injections; fair for spinal stenosis with caudal, interlaminar, and transforaminal epidural injections; and fair for post surgery syndrome with caudal epidural injections and limited with transforaminal epidural injections. • The evidence for therapeutic facet joint interventions is good for conventional radiofrequency, limited for pulsed radiofrequency, fair to good for lumbar facet joint nerve blocks, and limited for intraarticular injections. • For sacroiliac joint interventions, the evidence for cooled radiofrequency neurotomy is fair; limited for intraarticular injections and periarticular injections; and limited for both pulsed radiofrequency and conventional radiofrequency neurotomy. • For lumbar percutaneous adhesiolysis, the evidence is fair in managing chronic low back and lower extremity pain secondary to post surgery syndrome and spinal stenosis. • For intradiscal procedures, the evidence for intradiscal electrothermal therapy (IDET) and biaculoplasty is limited to fair and is limited for discTRODE. • For percutaneous disc decompression, the evidence is limited for automated percutaneous lumbar discectomy (APLD), percutaneous lumbar laser disc decompression, and Dekompressor; and limited to fair for nucleoplasty for which the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has issued a noncoverage decision. II. Cervical Spine • The evidence for cervical provocation discography is limited; whereas the evidence for diagnostic cervical facet joint nerve blocks is good with a criterion standard of 75% or greater relief with controlled diagnostic blocks. • The evidence is good for cervical interlaminar epidural injections for cervical disc herniation or radiculitis; fair for axial or discogenic pain, spinal stenosis, and post cervical surgery syndrome. • The evidence for therapeutic cervical facet joint interventions is fair for conventional cervical radiofrequency neurotomy and cervical medial branch blocks, and limited for cervical intraarticular injections. III. Thoracic Spine • The evidence is limited for thoracic provocation discography and is good for diagnostic accuracy of thoracic facet joint nerve blocks with a criterion standard of at least 75% pain relief with controlled diagnostic blocks. • The evidence is fair for thoracic epidural injections in managing thoracic pain. • The evidence for therapeutic thoracic facet joint nerve blocks is fair, limited for radiofrequency neurotomy, and not available for thoracic intraarticular injections. IV. Implantables • The evidence is fair for spinal cord stimulation (SCS) in managing patients with failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) and limited for implantable intrathecal drug administration systems. V. Anticoagulation • There is good evidence for risk of thromboembolic phenomenon in patients with antithrombotic therapy if discontinued, spontaneous epidural hematomas with or without traumatic injury in patients with or without anticoagulant therapy to discontinue or normalize INR with warfarin therapy, and the lack of necessity of discontinuation of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), including low dose aspirin prior to performing interventional techniques. • There is fair evidence with excessive bleeding, including epidural hematoma formation with interventional techniques when antithrombotic therapy is continued, the risk of higher thromboembolic phenomenon than epidural hematomas with discontinuation of antiplatelet therapy prior to interventional techniques and to continue phosphodiesterase inhibitors (dipyridamole, cilostazol, and Aggrenox). • There is limited evidence to discontinue antiplatelet therapy with platelet aggregation inhibitors to avoid bleeding and epidural hematomas and/or to continue antiplatelet therapy (clopidogrel, ticlopidine, prasugrel) during interventional techniques to avoid cerebrovascular and cardiovascular thromboembolic fatalities. • There islimited evidence in reference to newer antithrombotic agents dabigatran (Pradaxa) and rivaroxan (Xarelto) to discontinue to avoid bleeding and epidural hematomas and are continued during interventional techniques to avoid cerebrovascular and cardiovascular thromboembolic events. Conclusion: Evidence is fair to good for 62% of diagnostic and 52% of therapeutic interventions assessed. Disclaimer: The authors are solely responsible for the content of this article. No statement on this article should be construed as an official position of ASIPP. The guidelines do not represent “standard of care.” Key words: Interventional techniques , chronic spinal pain, diagnostic blocks, therapeutic interventions, facet joint interventions, epidural injections, epidural adhesiolysis, discography, radiofrequency, disc decompression, spinal cord stimulation, intrathecal implantable systems

scholarly journals An Update of Evaluation of Therapeutic Thoracic Facet Joint Interventions

2012 ◽  
Vol 4;15 (4;8) ◽  
pp. E463-E481
Author(s):  
Frank J.E. Falco
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Quality Assessment ◽  
Joint Pain ◽  
Facet Joint ◽  
Medial Branch ◽  
Facet Joints ◽  
Nerve Blocks ◽  
Radiofrequency Neurotomy ◽  
Facet Joint Interventions

Background: Chronic mid back and upper back pain caused by thoracic facet joints has been reported in 34% to 48% of patients based on responses to controlled diagnostic blocks. Systematic reviews have established moderate evidence for controlled comparative local anesthetic blocks of thoracic facet joints in the diagnosis of mid back and upper back pain, moderate evidence for therapeutic thoracic medial branch blocks, and limited evidence for radiofrequency neurotomy of thoracic medial branches. Study Design: Systematic review of therapeutic thoracic facet joint interventions. Objective: To determine the clinical utility of therapeutic thoracic facet joint interventions in the therapeutic management of chronic upper back and mid back pain. Methods: The available literature for the utility of facet joint interventions in the therapeutic management of thoracic facet joint pain was reviewed. The quality assessment and clinical relevance criteria utilized were the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group criteria as utilized for interventional techniques for randomized trials and the criteria developed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale criteria for observational studies. The level of evidence was classified as good, fair, and limited (or poor) based on the quality of evidence developed by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). Data sources included relevant literature identified through searches of PubMed and EMBASE from 1966 to March 2012, and manual searches of the bibliographies of known primary and review articles. Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measure was pain relief (short-term relief = up to 6 months and long-term > 6 months). Secondary outcome measures were improvement in functional status, psychological status, return to work, and reduction in opioid intake. Results: For this systematic review, 13 studies were identified. Of these, 7 studies were excluded, and a total of 4 studies (after removal of duplicate publication) met inclusion criteria for methodological quality assessment with one randomized trial and 3 non-randomized studies. The evidence is fair for therapeutic thoracic facet joint nerve blocks, limited for thoracic radiofrequency neurotomy, and not available for thoracic intraarticular injections. Limitations: The limitation of this systematic review includes a paucity of literature. The only positive studies were of medial branch blocks performed by the same group of authors. Conclusion: The evidence for therapeutic facet joint interventions is fair for medial branch blocks, whereas it is not available for intraarticular injections, and limited for radiofrequency neurotomy due to lack of literature. Key words: Chronic thoracic pain, mid back or upper back pain, thoracic facet or zygapophysial joint pain, facet joint nerve blocks, medial branch blocks, therapeutic thoracic medial branch blocks, thoracic radiofrequency neurotomy, thoracic intraarticular facet joint injections

scholarly journals Comprehensive Review of Neurophysiologic Basis and Diagnostic Interventions in Managing Chronic Spinal Pain

2009 ◽  
Vol 4;12 (4;7) ◽  
pp. E71-E121
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Criteria ◽  
Sacroiliac Joint ◽  
Facet Joint ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Nerve Blocks ◽  
Interventional Techniques ◽  
Level Ii ◽  
Level I ◽  
Chronic Spinal Pain

Background: Understanding the neurophysiological basis of chronic spinal pain and diagnostic interventional techniques is crucial in the proper diagnosis and management of chronic spinal pain.Central to the understanding of the structural basis of chronic spinal pain is the provision of physical diagnosis and validation of patient symptomatology. It has been shown that history, physical examination, imaging, and nerve conduction studies in non-radicular or discogenic pain are unable to diagnose the precise cause in 85% of the patients. In contrast, controlled diagnostic blocks have been shown to determine the cause of pain in as many as 85% of the patients. Objective: To provide evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for diagnostic interventional techniques. Design: Best evidence synthesis. Methods: Strength of evidence was assessed by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria utilizing 5 levels of evidence ranging from Level I to III with 3 subcategories in Level II. Diagnostic Criteria: Diagnostic criteria established by systematic reviews were utilized with controlled diagnostic blocks. Diagnostic criteria included at least 80% pain relief with controlled local anesthetic blocks with the ability to perform multiple maneuvers which were painful prior to the diagnostic blocks for facet joint and sacroiliac joint blocks, whereas for provocation discography, the criteria included concordant pain upon stimulation of the target disc with 2 adjacent discs producing no pain at all. Results: The indicated level of evidence for diagnostic lumbar, cervical, and thoracic facet joint nerve blocks is Level I or II-1. The indicated evidence is Level II-2 for lumbar and cervical discography, whereas it is Level II-3 for thoracic provocation discography. The evidence for diagnostic sacroiliac joint nerve blocks is Level II-2. Level of evidence for selective nerve root blocks for diagnostic purposes is Level II-3. Limitations: Limitations of this guideline preparation include a continued paucity of literature and conflicts in preparation of systematic reviews and guidelines. Conclusion: These guidelines include the evaluation of evidence for diagnostic interventional procedures in managing chronic spinal pain and recommendations. However, these guidelines do not constitute inflexible treatment recommendations. These guidelines also do not represent a “standard of care.” Key words: Diagnostic interventional techniques, chronic spinal pain, facet joint interventions, epidural procedures, provocation discography, sacroiliac joint blocks, post lumbar surgery syndrome, spinal stenosis, provocation discography

scholarly journals A Systematic Review of Therapeutic Facet Joint Interventions in Chronic Spinal Pain

2007 ◽  
Vol 1;10 (1;1) ◽  
pp. 229-253
Author(s):  
Mark V. Boswell
Keyword(s):  
Pain Relief ◽  
Facet Joint ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
Medial Branch ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Radiofrequency Neurotomy ◽  
Short And Long Term ◽  
Facet Joint Interventions ◽  
Joint Injections

Background: Facet joints are considered to be a common source of chronic spinal pain. Facet joint interventions, including intraarticular injections, medial branch nerve blocks, and neurotomy (radiofrequency and cryoneurolysis) are used to manage chronic facet-mediated spinal pain. A systematic review of therapeutic facet interventions published in January 2005, concluded that facet interventions were variably effective for short-term and long-term relief of facet joint pain. Objective: To provide an updated evaluation of the effectiveness of 3 types of facet joint interventions in managing chronic spinal pain. Study Design: A systematic review utilizing criteria established by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) for evaluation of randomized and non-randomized trials and the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group for randomized trials. Methods: Data sources included relevant literature of the English language identified through searches of MEDLINE and EMBASE (November 2004 to December 2006) and manual searches of bibliographies of known primary and review articles within the last 2 years. Results of the analyses were performed for the different modes of facet joint interventions for the cervical, thoracic and lumbar spine, to determine short- and long-term outcome measurements and complications associated with these procedures. Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measure was pain relief. For intraarticular facet joint injections and medial branch blocks, short-term pain relief was defined as relief lasting less than 6 weeks and long-term relief as 6 weeks or longer. For medial branch blocks, repeated injections at defined intervals provided long-term pain relief. For medial branch radiofrequency neurotomy, short-term pain relief was defined as relief lasting less than 3 months and long-term relief as lasting 3 months or longer. Other outcome measures included functional improvement, improvement of psychological status, and return to work. Results: For cervical intraarticular facet joint injections, the evidence is limited for short- and long-term pain relief. For lumbar intraarticular facet joint injections, the evidence is moderate for short- and long-term pain relief. For cervical, thoracic, and lumbar medial branch nerve blocks with local anesthetics (with or without steroids), the evidence is moderate for short- and longterm pain relief with repeat interventions. The evidence for pain relief with radiofrequency neurotomy of cervical and lumbar medial branch nerves is moderate for short- and long-term pain relief, and indeterminate for thoracic facet neurotomy. Conclusion: With intraarticular facet joint injections, the evidence for short- and long-term pain relief is limited for cervical pain and moderate for lumbar pain. For medial branch blocks, the evidence is moderate for short- and long-term pain relief. For medial branch neurotomy, the evidence is moderate for short- and long-term pain relief. Key words: Spinal pain, neck pain, low back pain, facet or zygapophysial joints, intraarticular facet joint injections, medial branch blocks, therapeutic medial branch blocks, radiofrequency neurotomy, cryodenervation.

scholarly journals Comprehensive Evidence-Based Guidelines for Facet Joint Interventions in the Management of Chronic Spinal Pain: American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP) Guidelines

2020 ◽  
Vol 3S;23 (5;3S) ◽  
pp. S1-S127
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Physical Examination ◽  
Facet Joint ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
Emission Computed Tomography ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Nerve Blocks ◽  
Facet Joint Interventions ◽  
Chronic Spinal Pain

Background: Chronic axial spinal pain is one of the major causes of significant disability and health care costs, with facet joints as one of the proven causes of pain. Objective: To provide evidence-based guidance in performing diagnostic and therapeutic facet joint interventions. Methods: The methodology utilized included the development of objectives and key questions with utilization of trustworthy standards. The literature pertaining to all aspects of facet joint interventions, was reviewed, with a best evidence synthesis of available literature and utilizing grading for recommendations. Summary of Evidence and Recommendations: Non-interventional diagnosis: • The level of evidence is II in selecting patients for facet joint nerve blocks at least 3 months after onset and failure of conservative management, with strong strength of recommendation for physical examination and clinical assessment. • The level of evidence is IV for accurate diagnosis of facet joint pain with physical examination based on symptoms and signs, with weak strength of recommendation. Imaging: • The level of evidence is I with strong strength of recommendation, for mandatory fluoroscopic or computed tomography (CT) guidance for all facet joint interventions. • The level of evidence is III with weak strength of recommendation for single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) . • The level of evidence is V with weak strength of recommendation for scintography, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and computed tomography (CT) . Interventional Diagnosis: Lumbar Spine: • The level of evidence is I to II with moderate to strong strength of recommendation for lumbar diagnostic facet joint nerve blocks. • Ten relevant diagnostic accuracy studies with 4 of 10 studies utilizing controlled comparative local anesthetics with concordant pain relief criterion standard of ≥ 80% were included. • The prevalence rates ranged from 27% to 40% with false-positive rates of 27% to 47%, with ≥ 80% pain relief.Limitations: The limitations of these guidelines include a paucity of high-quality studies in the majority of aspects of diagnosis and therapy. Conclusions: These facet joint interventions guidelines were prepared with a comprehensive review of the literature with methodologic quality assessment with determination of level of evidence and strength of recommendations Key words: Chronic spinal pain, interventional techniques, diagnostic blocks, therapeutic interventions, facet joint nerve blocks, intraarticular injections, radiofrequency neurolysis

scholarly journals Efficacy of Epidural Injections in Managing Chronic Spinal Pain: A Best Evidence Synthesis

2015 ◽  
Vol 6;18 (6;11) ◽  
pp. E939-E1004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan David Kaye
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
Epidural Injections ◽  
Level Ii ◽  
Interlaminar Approach ◽  
Best Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Chronic Spinal Pain

Background: Epidural injections have been used since 1901 in managing low back pain and sciatica. Spinal pain, disability, health, and economic impact continue to increase, despite numerous modalities of interventions available in managing chronic spinal pain. Thus far, systematic reviews performed to assess the efficacy of epidural injections in managing chronic spinal pain have yielded conflicting results. Objective: To evaluate and update the clinical utility of the efficacy of epidural injections in managing chronic spinal pain. Study Design: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials of epidural injections in managing chronic spinal pain. Methods: In this systematic review, randomized trials with a placebo control or an active-control design were included. The outcome measures were pain relief and functional status improvement. The quality of each individual article was assessed by Cochrane review criteria, as well as the Interventional Pain Management Techniques - Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment (IPM-QRB). Best evidence synthesis was conducted based on the qualitative level of evidence (Level I to V). Data sources included relevant literature identified through searches of PubMed for a period starting in 1966 through August 2015; Cochrane reviews; and manual searches of the bibliographies of known primary and review articles. Results: A total of 52 trials met inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis was not feasible. The evidence in managing lumbar disc herniation or radiculitis is Level II for long-term improvement either with caudal, interlaminar, or transforaminal epidural injections with no significant difference among the approaches. The evidence is Level II for long-term management of cervical disc herniation with interlaminar epidural injections. The evidence is Level II to III in managing thoracic disc herniation with an interlaminar approach. The evidence is Level II for caudal and lumbar interlaminar epidural injections with Level III evidence for lumbar transforaminal epidural injections for lumbar spinal stenosis. The evidence is Level II for cervical spinal stenosis management with an interlaminar approach The evidence is Level II for axial or discogenic pain without facet arthropathy or disc herniation treated with caudal or lumbar interlaminar injections in the lumbar region; whereas it is Level II in the cervical region treated with cervical interlaminar epidural injections. The evidence for post lumbar surgery syndrome is Level II with caudal epidural injections and for post cervical surgery syndrome it is Level II with cervical interlaminar epidural injections. Limitations: Even though this is a large systematic review with inclusion of a large number of randomized controlled trials, the paucity of high quality randomized trials literature continues to confound the evidence. Conclusion: This systematic review, with an assessment of the quality of manuscripts and outcome parameters, shows the efficacy of epidural injections in managing a multitude of chronic spinal conditions. Key words: Chronic pain, spinal pain, epidural injections, local anesthetic, steroids, interlaminar epidural injections, caudal epidural injections, transforaminal epidural injections

scholarly journals Assessment of the Escalating Growth of Facet Joint Interventions in the Medicare Population in the United States from 2000 to 2011

2013 ◽  
Vol 4;16 (4;7) ◽  
pp. E365-E378
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti
Keyword(s):  
Pain Management ◽  
Facet Joint ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
Medicare Beneficiaries ◽  
Annual Increase ◽  
Radiofrequency Neurotomy ◽  
Interventional Pain Management ◽  
Facet Joint Interventions ◽  
Lumbar Facet ◽  
Joint Injections

Background: Both the Office of Inspector General (OIG) and reports from studies of the utilization of facet joint interventions have expressed that explosive increases in facet joint interventions provided to spinal pain patients are a major concern. Study Design: The study is designed to assess the growth of facet joint interventions in managing spinal chronic pain in Medicare beneficiaries from 2000 to 2011. Objective: To assess the use of facet joint interventions in chronic pain management. Methods: The study was performed utilizing the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) physician supplier procedure summary master data from 2000 to 2011. Results: The utilization of all types of facet joint interventions increased enormously from 2000 to 2011, with an overall increase of 308% per 100,000 Medicare beneficiaries and a 13.6% average annual increase. In addition, the highest increases were seen for cervical/ thoracic radiofrequency neurotomy with 836%, followed by an increase of 662% for lumbar/ sacral radiofrequency neurotomy, a 359% increase in cervical/thoracic facet joint injections, and 228% increase in lumbosacral facet joint injections. In reference to the number of procedures performed, however, the highest numbers were in the lumbosacral region with 990,449 total procedures of lumbar facet joint blocks and 406,378 lumbosacral radiofreqency neurotomies in 2011. Cervical and thoracic facet joint nerve blocks were 317,220, whereas cervical and thoracic radiofrequency neurotomies were 97,526 in 2011. The data also showed that there were enormous increases in the proportion of procedures performed by the specialty of physical medicine and rehabilitation, with an increase of 781% and an annual increase of 21.9% excluding physicians of physical medicine and rehabilitation enrolled as interventional pain management or pain management. Even though the numbers were very low for nurse anesthetists, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants, the increases were from 143 in 2000 to 21,263 in 2011, providing an annual increase of 55.2%, an overall increase of 12,460%. Limitations: The limitations of this study included a lack of inclusion of Medicare participants in Medicare Advantage plans, as well as potential documentation, coding, and billing errors. Furthermore, the data provided for state utilizations is based on claims data for that state which also may include patients from contiguous or other states receiving services in those states. Conclusions: The explosive increase in the number of lumbar facet joint interventions performed began to wane in 2008. From 2008 to 2010, the utilization of facet joint interventions declined by 6%. Key Words: Chronic spinal pain, interventional pain management, interventional techniques, facet joint injections, medial branch blocks, radiofrequency neurotomy

scholarly journals A Best-Evidence Systematic Appraisal of the Diagnostic Accuracy and Utility of Facet (Zygapophysial) Joint Injections in Chronic Spinal Pain

2015 ◽  
Vol 18;4 (4;18) ◽  
pp. E497-E533 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Boswell
Keyword(s):  
Pain Relief ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Joint Pain ◽  
Facet Joint ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
Nerve Blocks ◽  
Zygapophysial Joint ◽  
Level Ii ◽  
Cervical Facet ◽  
Chronic Spinal Pain

Background: Spinal zygapophysial, or facet, joints are a source of axial spinal pain and referred pain in the extremities. Conventional clinical features and other noninvasive diagnostic modalities are unreliable in diagnosing zygapophysial joint pain. Study Design: A systematic review of the diagnostic accuracy of spinal facet joint nerve blocks. Objective: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of spinal facet joint nerve blocks in chronic spinal pain. Methods: A methodological quality assessment of included studies was performed using Quality Appraisal of Reliability Studies (QAREL). Only diagnostic accuracy studies meeting at least 50% of the designated inclusion criteria were utilized for analysis. The level of evidence was classified as Level I to V based on the grading of evidence utilizing best evidence synthesis. Data sources included relevant literature identified through searches of PubMed and other electronic searches published from 1966 through March 2015, Cochrane reviews, and manual searches of the bibliographies of known primary and review articles. Outcome Measures: Studies must have been performed utilizing controlled local anesthetic blocks. The criterion standard must have been at least 50% pain relief from baseline scores and the ability to perform previously painful movements. Results: The available evidence is Level I for lumbar facet joint nerve blocks with the inclusion of a total of 17 studies with dual diagnostic blocks, with at least 75% pain relief with an average prevalence of 16% to 41% and false-positive rates of 25% to 44%. The evidence for diagnosis of cervical facet joint pain with cervical facet joint nerve blocks is Level II based on a total of 11 controlled diagnostic accuracy studies, with significant variability among the prevalence in a heterogenous population with internal inconsistency. The prevalence rates ranged from 36% to 67% with at least 80% pain relief as the criterion standard and a false-positive rate of 27% to 63%. The level of evidence for the diagnostic accuracy of thoracic facet joint nerve blocks is Level II with 80% or higher pain relief as the criterion standard with a prevalence ranging from 34% to 48% and false-positive rates ranging from 42% to 48%. Limitations: The shortcomings of this systematic review include a paucity of literature related to the thoracic spine, continued debate on an appropriate gold standard, appropriateness of diagnostic blocks, and utility. Conclusion: The evidence is Level I for the diagnostic accuracy of lumbar facet joint nerve blocks, Level II for cervical facet joint nerve blocks, and Level II for thoracic facet joint nerve blocks in assessment of chronic spinal pain. Key words: Chronic spinal pain, lumbar facet or zygapophysial joint pain, cervical facet or zygapophysial joint pain, thoracic facet or zygapophysial joint pain, facet joint nerve blocks, medial branch blocks, controlled comparative local anesthetic blocks

scholarly journals An Update of the Effectiveness of Therapeutic Lumbar Facet Joint Interventions

2012 ◽  
Vol 6;15 (6;12) ◽  
pp. E909-E953
Author(s):  
Frank J.E. Falco
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Facet Joint ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Lumbar Facet Joint ◽  
Nerve Blocks ◽  
Radiofrequency Neurotomy ◽  
Facet Joint Interventions ◽  
Lumbar Facet

Background: Therapeutic lumbar facet joint interventions are implemented to provide long-term pain relief after the facet joint has been identified as the basis for low back pain. The therapeutic lumbar facet joint interventions generally used for the treatment of low back pain of facet joint origin are intraarticular facet joint injections, lumbar facet joint nerve blocks, and radiofrequency neurotomy. Objective: To evaluate and update the effect of therapeutic lumbar facet joint interventions in managing chronic low back pain. Study Design: A systematic review of therapeutic lumbar facet joint interventions for the treatment of chronic low back pain. Methods: The available literature on lumbar facet joint interventions in managing chronic low back pain was reviewed. The quality assessment and clinical relevance criteria utilized were the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group criteria as utilized for interventional techniques for randomized trials and the criteria developed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale criteria for observational studies. The level of evidence was classified as good, fair, and limited or poor based on the quality of evidence developed by the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force. Data sources included relevant literature identified through searches of PubMed and EMBASE from 1966 through June 2012, and manual searches of the bibliographies of known primary and review articles. Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measure was pain relief with short-term relief defined as up to 6 months and long-term relief as 12 months. Secondary outcome measures were improvement in functional status, psychological status, return to work, and reduction in opioid intake. Results: For this systematic review, 122 studies were identified. Of these, 11 randomized trials and 14 observational studies met inclusion criteria for methodological quality assessment. The evidence for radiofrequency neurotomy is good and fair to good for lumbar facet joint nerve blocks for short- and long-term improvement; whereas the evidence for intraarticular injections and pulsed radiofrequency neurotomy is limited. Limitations: The limitations of this systematic review include the continued paucity of evidence, specifically for intraarticular injection therapy. Conclusion: In summary, there is good evidence for the use of conventional radiofrequency neurotomy, and fair to good evidence for lumbar facet joint nerve blocks for the treatment of chronic lumbar facet joint pain resulting in short-term and long-term pain relief and functional improvement. There is limited evidence for intraarticular facet joint injections and pulsed radiofrequency thermoneurolysis. Key Words: Spinal pain, chronic low back pain, lumbar intraarticular facet joint blocks, lumbar facet joint nerve blocks, lumbar conventional radiofrequency neurotomy, pulsed radiofrequency neurolysis

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document