1
|
Manchikanti L, Knezevic NN, Knezevic E, Abdi S, Sanapati MR, Soin A, Wargo BW, Navani A, Atluri S, Gharibo CG, Simopoulos TT, Kosanovic R, Abd-Elsayed A, Kaye AD, Hirsch JA. A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Effectiveness of Radiofrequency Neurotomy in Managing Chronic Neck Pain. Pain Ther 2022; 12:1-48. [PMID: 36465720 PMCID: PMC9686245 DOI: 10.1007/s40122-022-00455-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/23/2022] [Accepted: 10/28/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Extensive research into potential sources of neck pain and referred pain into the upper extremities and head has shown that the cervical facet joints can be a potential pain source confirmed by precision, diagnostic blocks. Study Design Systematic review and meta-analysis utilizing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist, quality assessment of the included studies, conventional and single-arm meta-analysis, and best evidence synthesis. Objective The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the effectiveness of radiofrequency neurotomy as a therapeutic cervical facet joint intervention in managing chronic neck pain. Methods Available literature was included. Methodologic quality assessment of studies was performed from 1996 to September 2021. The level of evidence of effectiveness was determined. Results Based on the qualitative and quantitative analysis with single-arm meta-analysis and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) system of appraisal, with inclusion of one randomized controlled trial (RCT) of 12 patients in the treatment group and eight positive observational studies with inclusion of 589 patients showing positive outcomes with moderate to high clinical applicability, the evidence is level II in managing neck pain with cervical radiofrequency neurotomy. The evidence for managing cervicogenic headache was level III to IV with qualitative analysis and single-arm meta-analysis and GRADE system of appraisal, with the inclusion of 15 patients in the treatment group in a positive RCT and 134 patients in observational studies. An overwhelming majority of the studies produced multiple lesions. Limitations There was a paucity of literature and heterogeneity among the available studies. Conclusion This systematic review and meta-analysis shows level II evidence with radiofrequency neurotomy on a long-term basis in managing chronic neck pain with level III to IV evidence in managing cervicogenic headaches. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40122-022-00455-0.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laxmaiah Manchikanti
- Pain Management Centers of America, 67 Lakeview Drive, Paducah, KY 42001 USA
- Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY USA
- Department of Anesthesiology, School of Medicine, LSU Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, LA USA
| | - Nebojsa Nick Knezevic
- Department of Anesthesiology, Advocate Illinois Masonic Medical Center, Chicago, IL USA
- College of Medicine, University of Illinois, Chicago, IL USA
| | - Emilija Knezevic
- College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL USA
| | - Salahadin Abdi
- Department of Pain Medicine, University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX USA
| | | | - Amol Soin
- Ohio Pain Clinic and Wright State University, Dayton, OH USA
| | - Bradley W. Wargo
- Interventional Pain Management, Mays & Schnapp Neurospine & Pain, Memphis, TN USA
| | - Annu Navani
- Comprehensive Spine & Sports Center and Le Reve Regenerative Wellness, Campbell, CA USA
| | | | | | - Thomas T. Simopoulos
- Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Arnold Warfield Pain Management Center, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA USA
| | | | - Alaa Abd-Elsayed
- UW Health Pain Services and UW Pain Clinic, Chronic Pain Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, and University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health,, Madison, WI USA
| | - Alan D. Kaye
- Anesthesiology and Pharmacology, Toxicology, and Neurosciences, LSUHSC, Shreveport, LA USA
| | - Joshua A. Hirsch
- Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Hurley RW, Adams MCB, Barad M, Bhaskar A, Bhatia A, Chadwick A, Deer TR, Hah J, Hooten WM, Kissoon NR, Lee DW, Mccormick Z, Moon JY, Narouze S, Provenzano DA, Schneider BJ, van Eerd M, Van Zundert J, Wallace MS, Wilson SM, Zhao Z, Cohen SP. Consensus practice guidelines on interventions for cervical spine (facet) joint pain from a multispecialty international working group. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2022; 47:3-59. [PMID: 34764220 PMCID: PMC8639967 DOI: 10.1136/rapm-2021-103031] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/12/2021] [Accepted: 08/02/2021] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The past two decades have witnessed a surge in the use of cervical spine joint procedures including joint injections, nerve blocks and radiofrequency ablation to treat chronic neck pain, yet many aspects of the procedures remain controversial. METHODS In August 2020, the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine and the American Academy of Pain Medicine approved and charged the Cervical Joint Working Group to develop neck pain guidelines. Eighteen stakeholder societies were identified, and formal request-for-participation and member nomination letters were sent to those organizations. Participating entities selected panel members and an ad hoc steering committee selected preliminary questions, which were then revised by the full committee. Each question was assigned to a module composed of 4-5 members, who worked with the Subcommittee Lead and the Committee Chairs on preliminary versions, which were sent to the full committee after revisions. We used a modified Delphi method whereby the questions were sent to the committee en bloc and comments were returned in a non-blinded fashion to the Chairs, who incorporated the comments and sent out revised versions until consensus was reached. Before commencing, it was agreed that a recommendation would be noted with >50% agreement among committee members, but a consensus recommendation would require ≥75% agreement. RESULTS Twenty questions were selected, with 100% consensus achieved in committee on 17 topics. Among participating organizations, 14 of 15 that voted approved or supported the guidelines en bloc, with 14 questions being approved with no dissensions or abstentions. Specific questions addressed included the value of clinical presentation and imaging in selecting patients for procedures, whether conservative treatment should be used before injections, whether imaging is necessary for blocks, diagnostic and prognostic value of medial branch blocks and intra-articular joint injections, the effects of sedation and injectate volume on validity, whether facet blocks have therapeutic value, what the ideal cut-off value is for designating a block as positive, how many blocks should be performed before radiofrequency ablation, the orientation of electrodes, whether larger lesions translate into higher success rates, whether stimulation should be used before radiofrequency ablation, how best to mitigate complication risks, if different standards should be applied to clinical practice and trials, and the indications for repeating radiofrequency ablation. CONCLUSIONS Cervical medial branch radiofrequency ablation may provide benefit to well-selected individuals, with medial branch blocks being more predictive than intra-articular injections. More stringent selection criteria are likely to improve denervation outcomes, but at the expense of false-negatives (ie, lower overall success rate). Clinical trials should be tailored based on objectives, and selection criteria for some may be more stringent than what is ideal in clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert W Hurley
- Anesthesiology, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA
| | - Meredith C B Adams
- Anesthesiology, Wake Forest Baptist Health, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA
| | - Meredith Barad
- Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Stanford Hospital and Clinics, Redwood City, California, USA
| | - Arun Bhaskar
- Anesthesiology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust Haemodialysis Clinic, Hayes Satellite Unit, Hayes, UK
| | - Anuj Bhatia
- Anesthesia and Pain Management, University of Toronto and University Health Network - Toronto Western Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Andrea Chadwick
- Anesthesiology, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas, USA
| | - Timothy R Deer
- Spine and Nerve Center of the Virginias, West Virginia University - Health Sciences Campus, Morgantown, West Virginia, USA
| | - Jennifer Hah
- Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California, USA
| | | | | | - David Wonhee Lee
- Fullerton Orthopaedic Surgery Medical Group, Fullerton, California, USA
| | - Zachary Mccormick
- Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Jee Youn Moon
- Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
- Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Jongno-gu, South Korea
| | - Samer Narouze
- Center for Pain Medicine, Summa Western Reserve Hospital, Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio, USA
| | - David A Provenzano
- Pain Diagnostics and Interventional Care, Sewickley, Pennsylvania, USA
- Pain Diagnostics and Interventional Care, Edgeworth, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Byron J Schneider
- Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
| | - Maarten van Eerd
- Anesthesiology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Limburg, The Netherlands
| | - Jan Van Zundert
- Anesthesiology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Limburg, The Netherlands
| | - Mark S Wallace
- Anesthesiology, UCSD Medical Center - Thornton Hospital, San Diego, California, USA
| | | | - Zirong Zhao
- Neurology, VA Healthcare Center District of Columbia, Washington, District of Columbia, USA
| | - Steven P Cohen
- Anesthesiology, Neurology, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation and Psychiatry, Pain Medicine Division, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Hurley RW, Adams MCB, Barad M, Bhaskar A, Bhatia A, Chadwick A, Deer TR, Hah J, Hooten WM, Kissoon NR, Lee DW, Mccormick Z, Moon JY, Narouze S, Provenzano DA, Schneider BJ, van Eerd M, Van Zundert J, Wallace MS, Wilson SM, Zhao Z, Cohen SP. Consensus practice guidelines on interventions for cervical spine (facet) joint pain from a multispecialty international working group. PAIN MEDICINE (MALDEN, MASS.) 2021; 22:2443-2524. [PMID: 34788462 PMCID: PMC8633772 DOI: 10.1093/pm/pnab281] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/15/2021] [Accepted: 09/15/2021] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The past two decades have witnessed a surge in the use of cervical spine joint procedures including joint injections, nerve blocks and radiofrequency ablation to treat chronic neck pain, yet many aspects of the procedures remain controversial. METHODS In August 2020, the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine and the American Academy of Pain Medicine approved and charged the Cervical Joint Working Group to develop neck pain guidelines. Eighteen stakeholder societies were identified, and formal request-for-participation and member nomination letters were sent to those organizations. Participating entities selected panel members and an ad hoc steering committee selected preliminary questions, which were then revised by the full committee. Each question was assigned to a module composed of 4-5 members, who worked with the Subcommittee Lead and the Committee Chairs on preliminary versions, which were sent to the full committee after revisions. We used a modified Delphi method whereby the questions were sent to the committee en bloc and comments were returned in a non-blinded fashion to the Chairs, who incorporated the comments and sent out revised versions until consensus was reached. Before commencing, it was agreed that a recommendation would be noted with >50% agreement among committee members, but a consensus recommendation would require ≥75% agreement. RESULTS Twenty questions were selected, with 100% consensus achieved in committee on 17 topics. Among participating organizations, 14 of 15 that voted approved or supported the guidelines en bloc, with 14 questions being approved with no dissensions or abstentions. Specific questions addressed included the value of clinical presentation and imaging in selecting patients for procedures, whether conservative treatment should be used before injections, whether imaging is necessary for blocks, diagnostic and prognostic value of medial branch blocks and intra-articular joint injections, the effects of sedation and injectate volume on validity, whether facet blocks have therapeutic value, what the ideal cut-off value is for designating a block as positive, how many blocks should be performed before radiofrequency ablation, the orientation of electrodes, whether larger lesions translate into higher success rates, whether stimulation should be used before radiofrequency ablation, how best to mitigate complication risks, if different standards should be applied to clinical practice and trials, and the indications for repeating radiofrequency ablation. CONCLUSIONS Cervical medial branch radiofrequency ablation may provide benefit to well-selected individuals, with medial branch blocks being more predictive than intra-articular injections. More stringent selection criteria are likely to improve denervation outcomes, but at the expense of false-negatives (ie, lower overall success rate). Clinical trials should be tailored based on objectives, and selection criteria for some may be more stringent than what is ideal in clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert W Hurley
- Anesthesiology, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA
| | - Meredith C B Adams
- Anesthesiology, Wake Forest Baptist Health, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA
| | - Meredith Barad
- Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Stanford Hospital and Clinics, Redwood City, California, USA
| | - Arun Bhaskar
- Anesthesiology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust Haemodialysis Clinic, Hayes Satellite Unit, Hayes, UK
| | - Anuj Bhatia
- Anesthesia and Pain Management, University of Toronto and University Health Network - Toronto Western Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Andrea Chadwick
- Anesthesiology, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas, USA
| | - Timothy R Deer
- Spine and Nerve Center of the Virginias, West Virginia University - Health Sciences Campus, Morgantown, West Virginia, USA
| | - Jennifer Hah
- Anesthesiology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California, USA
| | | | | | - David Wonhee Lee
- Fullerton Orthopaedic Surgery Medical Group, Fullerton, California, USA
| | - Zachary Mccormick
- Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Jee Youn Moon
- Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
- Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Jongno-gu, South Korea
| | - Samer Narouze
- Center for Pain Medicine, Summa Western Reserve Hospital, Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio, USA
| | - David A Provenzano
- Pain Diagnostics and Interventional Care, Sewickley, Pennsylvania, USA
- Pain Diagnostics and Interventional Care, Edgeworth, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Byron J Schneider
- Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
| | - Maarten van Eerd
- Anesthesiology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Limburg, The Netherlands
| | - Jan Van Zundert
- Anesthesiology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Limburg, The Netherlands
| | - Mark S Wallace
- Anesthesiology, UCSD Medical Center - Thornton Hospital, San Diego, California, USA
| | | | - Zirong Zhao
- Neurology, VA Healthcare Center District of Columbia, Washington, District of Columbia, USA
| | - Steven P Cohen
- Anesthesia, WRNMMC, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
- Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, WRNMMC, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
- Anesthesiology, Neurology, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation and Psychiatry, Pain Medicine Division, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Engel A, King W, Schneider BJ, Duszynski B, Bogduk N. The Effectiveness of Cervical Medial Branch Thermal Radiofrequency Neurotomy Stratified by Selection Criteria: A Systematic Review of the Literature. PAIN MEDICINE 2020; 21:2726-2737. [DOI: 10.1093/pm/pnaa219] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Objective
To determine the effectiveness of cervical medial branch thermal radiofrequency neurotomy in the treatment of neck pain or cervicogenic headache based on different selection criteria.
Design
Comprehensive systematic review.
Methods
A comprehensive literature search was conducted, and the authors screened and evaluated the studies. The Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system was used to assess all eligible studies.
Outcome Measures
The primary outcome measure assessed was the success rate of the procedure, defined by varying degrees of pain relief following neurotomy. Data are stratified by number of diagnostic blocks and degree of pain relief.
Results
Results varied by selection criteria, which included triple placebo-controlled medial branch blocks, dual comparative medial branch blocks, single medial branch blocks, intra-articular blocks, physical examination findings, and symptoms alone. Outcome data showed a greater degree of pain relief more often when patients were selected by triple placebo-controlled medial branch blocks or dual comparative medial branch blocks, producing 100% relief of the index pain. The degree of pain relief was similar when triple or dual comparative blocks were used.
Conclusions
Higher degrees of relief from cervical medial branch thermal radiofrequency neurotomy are more often achieved, to a statistically significant extent, if patients are selected on the basis of complete relief of index pain following comparative diagnostic blocks. If selected based on lesser degrees of relief, patients are less likely to obtain complete relief.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrew Engel
- Affordable Pain Management, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Wade King
- Mayo Multidisciplinary Pain Clinic, Mayo Private Hospital, Taree, NSW, Australia
| | - Byron J Schneider
- Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee
| | | | - Nikolai Bogduk
- University of Newcastle, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Newcastle, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Cohen SP, Bhaskar A, Bhatia A, Buvanendran A, Deer T, Garg S, Hooten WM, Hurley RW, Kennedy DJ, McLean BC, Moon JY, Narouze S, Pangarkar S, Provenzano DA, Rauck R, Sitzman BT, Smuck M, van Zundert J, Vorenkamp K, Wallace MS, Zhao Z. Consensus practice guidelines on interventions for lumbar facet joint pain from a multispecialty, international working group. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2020; 45:424-467. [PMID: 32245841 PMCID: PMC7362874 DOI: 10.1136/rapm-2019-101243] [Citation(s) in RCA: 145] [Impact Index Per Article: 36.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/21/2019] [Revised: 02/07/2020] [Accepted: 02/11/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The past two decades have witnessed a surge in the use of lumbar facet blocks and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) to treat low back pain (LBP), yet nearly all aspects of the procedures remain controversial. METHODS After approval by the Board of Directors of the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, letters were sent to a dozen pain societies, as well as representatives from the US Departments of Veterans Affairs and Defense. A steering committee was convened to select preliminary questions, which were revised by the full committee. Questions were assigned to 4-5 person modules, who worked with the Subcommittee Lead and Committee Chair on preliminary versions, which were sent to the full committee. We used a modified Delphi method, whereby the questions were sent to the committee en bloc and comments were returned in a non-blinded fashion to the Chair, who incorporated the comments and sent out revised versions until consensus was reached. RESULTS 17 questions were selected for guideline development, with 100% consensus achieved by committee members on all topics. All societies except for one approved every recommendation, with one society dissenting on two questions (number of blocks and cut-off for a positive block before RFA), but approving the document. Specific questions that were addressed included the value of history and physical examination in selecting patients for blocks, the value of imaging in patient selection, whether conservative treatment should be used before injections, whether imaging is necessary for block performance, the diagnostic and prognostic value of medial branch blocks (MBB) and intra-articular (IA) injections, the effects of sedation and injectate volume on validity, whether facet blocks have therapeutic value, what the ideal cut-off value is for a prognostic block, how many blocks should be performed before RFA, how electrodes should be oriented, the evidence for larger lesions, whether stimulation should be used before RFA, ways to mitigate complications, if different standards should be applied to clinical practice and clinical trials and the evidence for repeating RFA (see table 12 for summary). CONCLUSIONS Lumbar medial branch RFA may provide benefit to well-selected individuals, with MBB being more predictive than IA injections. More stringent selection criteria are likely to improve denervation outcomes, but at the expense of more false-negatives. Clinical trials should be tailored based on objectives, and selection criteria for some may be more stringent than what is ideal in clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Steven P Cohen
- Anesthesiology, Pain Medicine Division, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Arun Bhaskar
- Anesthesiology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust Haemodialysis Clinic Hayes Satellite Unit, Hayes, UK
| | - Anuj Bhatia
- Anesthesia and Pain Management, University of Toronto and University Health Network-Toronto Western Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - Tim Deer
- Spine & Nerve Centers, Charleston, West Virginia, USA
| | - Shuchita Garg
- Anesthesiology, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
| | | | - Robert W Hurley
- Anesthesiology, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA
| | - David J Kennedy
- Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
| | - Brian C McLean
- Anesthesiology, Tripler Army Medical Center, Tripler Army Medical Center, Hawaii, USA
| | - Jee Youn Moon
- Dept of Anesthesiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, The Republic of Korea
| | - Samer Narouze
- Center for Pain Medicine, Summa Western Reserve Hospital, Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio, USA
| | - Sanjog Pangarkar
- Dept of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | | | - Richard Rauck
- Carolinas Pain Institute, Winston Salem, North Carolina, USA
| | | | - Matthew Smuck
- Dept.of Orthopaedic Surgery, Division of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, Stanford Medicine, Stanford, California, USA
| | - Jan van Zundert
- Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Multidisciplinary Pain Center, Ziekenhuis Oost-Limburg, Lanaken, Belgium
- Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Mark S Wallace
- Anesthesiology, UCSD Medical Center-Thornton Hospital, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Zirong Zhao
- Neurology, VA Healthcare Center District of Columbia, Washington, District of Columbia, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Wahezi SE, Molina JJ, Alexeev E, Georgy JS, Haramati N, Erosa SA, Shah JM, Downie S. Cervical Medial Branch Block Volume Dependent Dispersion Patterns as a Predictor for Ablation Success: A Cadaveric Study. PM R 2018; 11:631-639. [PMID: 30367999 DOI: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2018.10.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/09/2018] [Accepted: 10/03/2018] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Neck pain is one of the most common causes of chronic pain and the fourth leading cause of disability worldwide; it is estimated that between 36% and 67% of this pain is due to facet arthropathy. For patients who have pain refractory to conservative treatments literature supports management with diagnostic cervical medial branch blocks (MBBs) to identify the associated facet innervation as the source of pain followed by therapeutic radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of the identified nerves. Cervical RFA has good published outcomes; however, the procedure is dependent upon the specificity of the diagnostic block to achieve maximal success. Currently, this prerequisite test has false positive rates between 27% and 63% and recent studies have shown that this may, in part, be a consequence of currently accepted injection volumes of 0.50 mL or more, which may decrease the sensitivity of MBBs. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the possible differences in volume dispersion between 0.25 and 0.50 mL of injectate during cervical MBBs. STUDY DESIGN Cadaveric study. SETTING An academic medical center in the United States. PATIENTS Not applicable. METHODS This was a cadaveric study in which six subjects were chosen with intact cervical spines. Cervical MBB were performed bilaterally at the midcervical spine, using a posterior approach under fluoroscopic guidance. 0.25 or 0.50 mL of a 9:1 solution of Omnipaque 180 mg iodine/mL and 1% medical grade methylene blue were administered on the left and right sides, respectively. Postinjection computed tomography (CT) imaging and gross dissection were performed to assess injectate spread. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Outcome measures after using commonly injected volumes for cervical MBB, included visualized and measured spread (by CT and gross dissection) of cervical medial branch blocks, coating adjacent structures not targeted by RFA. RESULTS Postinjection CT imaging and cadaveric dissection demonstrated that, although both volumes adequately coated the medial branches, the 0.50 mL cohort reliably spread dorsally to superficial muscles (splenius) and nerves distant from the targeted nerves (dorsal motor branches to splenius), whereas the 0.25 mL injectate cohort was contained in the deep and intermediate muscular cervical layers directly juxtaposed to the targeted cMBBs. CONCLUSION Results suggest that 0.50 mL injections of local anesthetic during cervical MBBs contacts many nonintended targets, thus decreasing the specificity of a targeted diagnostic cervical MBB. Furthermore, we demonstrated that 0.25 mL of injectate reliably bathed the cervical medial branches without extensive extravasation. This indicates that there would potentially be fewer local anesthetic effects on distant tissues, increasing the specificity of cervical MBBs and likely improving RFA planning.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sayed E Wahezi
- Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Department of Anesthesiology, Multidisciplinary Pain Program, 1250 Waters Place, Tower Two, 8th Floor, Bronx, New York 10461
| | - Jocelin J Molina
- Department of Anesthesiology, Montefiore Medical Center, 111 East 210th Street, Bronx, NY 10467
| | - Edward Alexeev
- Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Montefiore Medical Center, 150 E 210 Street, Bronx, NY 10467
| | - John S Georgy
- Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Montefiore Medical Center, 150 E 210 Street, Bronx, NY 10467
| | - Nogah Haramati
- Department of Radiology, Montefiore Medical Center, 1825 Eastchester Rd, Bronx, NY 10461
| | - Stephen A Erosa
- Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Montefiore Medical Center, 150 E 210 Street, Bronx, NY 10467
| | - Jay M Shah
- Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Montefiore Medical Center, 150 E 210 Street, Bronx, NY 10467
| | - Sherry Downie
- Department of Structural Biology and Anatomy, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 1300 Morris Park Avenue, Bronx, NY 10461
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
van Eerd M, Lataster A, Sommer M, Patijn J, van Kleef M. A Modified Posterolateral Approach for Radiofrequency Denervation of the Medial Branch of the Cervical Segmental Nerve in Cervical Facet Joint Pain Based on Anatomical Considerations. Pain Pract 2016; 17:596-603. [DOI: 10.1111/papr.12499] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/30/2015] [Revised: 06/30/2016] [Accepted: 07/08/2016] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Maarten van Eerd
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Management; University Medical Centre Maastricht; Maastricht The Netherlands
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Management; Amphia Ziekenhuis; Breda The Netherlands
| | - Arno Lataster
- Department of Anatomy and Embryology; CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care; Maastricht University; Maastricht The Netherlands
| | - Micha Sommer
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Management; University Medical Centre Maastricht; Maastricht The Netherlands
| | - Jacob Patijn
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Management; University Medical Centre Maastricht; Maastricht The Netherlands
| | - Maarten van Kleef
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Management; University Medical Centre Maastricht; Maastricht The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|