Comparison of Endoscopic Facet Joint Denervation to the Percutaneous Technique Regarding Efficacy in Patients With Low Back Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Full-Endoscopic Sacroiliac Joint Denervation for Painful Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction: A Prospective 2-Year Clinical Outcomes and Predictors for Improved Outcomes

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Full-endoscopic sacroiliac joint denervation (FE-SJD) is a novel technique for the management of pain secondary to sacroiliac joint dysfunction. The aim of this study was to assess the long-term efficacy, safety, clinical outcomes, and outcome predictors of uniportal full-endoscopic sacroiliac joint denervation.

METHODS

From 2019 to 2021, a total of 47 consecutive patients with pain secondary to sacroiliac joint dysfunction underwent uniportal FE-SJD through posterior approach by a single fellowship-trained spine surgeon. A retrospective analysis of perioperative parameters, complications, and clinical outcomes were obtained prospectively.

RESULTS

The patient cohort had a mean age of 59.4 ± 14.0 years, with 63.8% females. Symptom duration averaged 62.1 ± 53.7 months. The mean operative time was 57.1 ± 16.8 minutes. All patients were discharged on the same day of surgery. Significant improvement was noted in preoperative visual analog score (back) and Oswestry Disability Index scores at 3, 6, 12 months, and 2 years (P < .001). Thirty-four patients (72.3%) returned to normal functioning with an average of 82% pain relief and a satisfaction rate of 78.7% at a mean follow-up of 18.2 ± 13.1 months. There were no intraoperative complications. One patient had postoperative right L5 dysesthesia. Seven patients (14.9%) underwent contralateral FE-SJD due to satisfaction with the index procedure but residual pain on the contralateral side. Concomitant lumbar issues correlated with less functional improvement at 2 years (P = .009).

CONCLUSION

The long-term clinical results of FE-SJD are favorable. Endoscopic denervation of the dorsal rami branches supplying the sacroiliac joint represents a safe, effective, and durable option to address pain secondary to sacroiliac joint dysfunction. A significant factor that influences outcomes is the presence of concomitant lumbar pathology. Further research is needed to compare this technique with current available treatment options.

Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation and endoscopic neurotomy for lumbar facet joint syndrome: are they good enough?

OBJECTIVE

Lumbar facet joint (LFJ) syndrome is one of the common causes of low back pain (LBP). There are different views on percutaneous and endoscopic radiofrequency. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to explore the therapeutic effect of radiofrequency ablation on LBP originating from LFJ and compare the therapeutic effect of percutaneous radiofrequency ablation and endoscopic neurotomy.

METHODS

We included randomized controlled trials which compared the efficiency of percutaneous radiofrequency ablation and conservative treatment (sham procedures, facet joint injection, physiotherapy, exercise, or oral medication) or compared the efficiency of percutaneous radiofrequency ablation and endoscopic neurotomy for LFJ syndrome. We searched in PubMed and Web of Science from inception to March 27, 2023. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software.

RESULTS

A total of 11 randomized controlled trials were included. Among them, nine studies were used for evaluating efficiency of percutaneous radiofrequency ablation, and two studies were used for evaluating efficiency of endoscopic neurotomy. Pooled data from two studies reporting outcomes at 1 year did not show a benefit from facet joint denervation by comparing the percutaneous radiofrequency ablation and conservative treatment (standardized mean difference (SMD) = -0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) [-2.10, 0.37], P = 0.17). There was no significant difference between percutaneous radiofrequency ablation and endoscopic neurotomy at 1-month follow-up (mean difference (MD) = -0.13, 95%CI [-0.18, -0.44], P = 0.41). At 12-month follow-up the pain relief in the endoscopic neurotomy was significantly better than that in the percutaneous radiofrequency ablation group (MD = 1.98, 95%CI [1.60, 2.36], P < 0 .0001).

CONCLUSION

The LBP was significantly relieved shortly after percutaneous radiofrequency ablation. Compared with percutaneous radiofrequency ablation, endoscopic neurotomy seems to have a longer effect. A longer follow-up period is needed to confirm its effectiveness.

Facet Joint Syndrome: Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, and Treatment

Facet joint osteoarthritis (OA) is the most frequent form of facet joint syndrome. Medical history, referred pain patterns, physical examination, and diagnostic imaging studies (standard radiographs, magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography and single-photon emission computed tomography) may suggest but not confirm lumbar facet joint (LFJ) syndrome as a source of low back pain (LBP). However, the diagnosis and treatment of facet joint syndrome is still controversial and needs further study. It is widely acknowledged that block with local anesthetic is perhaps the most effective method to establish a diagnosis of pain from LFJ. Particularly, there are different rates of success among different populations selected for diagnostic block with various positive criteria. Currently, in addition to conservative treatments for pain such as painkillers, functional exercises, and massage, there are many other methods, including block, denervation of the nerves that innervate the joints by radiofrequency, freezing or endoscopy, and injections. Due to the limited duration of pain relief from neurolysis of medial branch, many scholars have recently turned their targets to dorsal roots and LFJ capsules. Therefore, we reviewed the latest research progress of facet joint syndrome from diagnosis to treatment.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocol on How Best to Use Non-Pharmacologic Therapies to Manage Chronic Low Back Pain and Associated Depression

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy of different non-pharmacologic therapies (NPTs) on relieving depressive symptoms and pain intensity in individuals living with chronic low back pain (LBP) and associated depression.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of seven English databases and two Chinese databases from inception to the search date will be undertaken. The reference lists of previously published relevant reviews and included trials will also be searched. Only peer-reviewed and published moderate-to-high quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for chronic LBP and associated depression treated with NPTs will be considered. Two independent reviewers will identify studies, extract data, assess risk of bias, and evaluate the strength of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Meta-analysis will be conducted to estimate the treatment effect of various NPTs. Heterogeneity will be assessed using Cochrane's Q and the I-squared statistics. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses will be performed to assess the robustness of findings. A funnel plot will be developed to evaluate reporting bias, and Begg's and Egger's tests will be used to assess funnel plot symmetries.

RESULTS

This protocol outlines the planned scope and methodology for an upcoming systematic review and meta-analysis, which will provide up-to-date evidence on 1) which NPTs are associated with improvements in depressive symptoms and pain intensity and 2) whether the effects of NPTs on chronic LBP and associated depression vary according to clinical condition, participant, and treatment characteristics.

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analyses of moderate-to-high quality RCTs will help to develop specific recommendations on prescribing NPTs in patients with chronic LBP and associated depression.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This protocol is registered on the International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (INPLASY) protocols platform as record No. INPLASY202260055.