Ignoring the sacroiliac joint in chronic low back pain is costly

Effect of revision sacroiliac joint fusion on unresolved pain and disability: a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

The sacroiliac (SI) joint is recognized as a source of low back pain in 15-30% of patients. Though randomized controlled trials have shown clinical improvement following SI joint fusion in 83.1% of patients, revision rates of 2.9% within 2 years have been reported. There is a paucity of literature reviewing this small yet significant population of patients requiring revision surgery.

METHODS

Following IRB approval, retrospective review of patients, who underwent a revision SI joint fusion from 2009 to 2021 was completed. Patient-reported outcomes were measured before and at each clinic visit after surgery with visual analoge scale (VAS) for back pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Patient characteristics (chronic opiate use and prior lumbar fusion) and surgical factors (operative approach, type/number of implants and use of bone graft) were recorded. Patient-reported outcomes were evaluated with Paired t and Wilcoxon signed rank tests. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression determined if patients met the minimally clinical important differences (MCID) for VAS-back pain and ODI scores at 1 year.

RESULTS

Fifty-two patients (77% female) with an average age of 49.1 (SD ± 11.1) years met inclusion criteria. Forty-four had single sided revisions and eight bilateral revisions. At 1 year follow-up there was no significant improvement in VAS-Back (p = 0.06) or ODI (p = 0.06). Patients with chronic opioid use were 8.5 times less likely to achieve the MDC for ODI scores (OR 0.118, p = 0.029). There was no difference in outcomes when comparing the different surgical approaches (p = 0.41).

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrates patients undergoing revision surgery have moderate improvement in low back pain, however, few have complete resolution of their symptoms. Specific patient factors, such as chronic opiate use and female sex may decrease the expected improvement in patient-reported outcomes following surgery. Failure to obtain relief may be due to incorrect indications, lack of biologic fusion and/or presence of co-pathologies. Further clinical examination and consistent long-term follow-up, clarify the role revision surgery plays in long-term patient outcomes.

Cooled radiofrequency ablation of the sacroiliac joint a retrospective case series

BACKGROUND

Sacroiliac (SI) joint dysfunction is a common source of back pain. Recent evidence from different parts of the world suggest that cooled radiofrequency ablation of sacral nerves supplying the SI joints has superior pain alleviating properties than currently available treatment options for SI joint dysfunction.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

After obtaining institutional review board approval, the medical records of 81 patients who underwent cooled radiofrequency ablation in a single institution and by a single surgeon were analyzed retrospectively. The recurrence of pain, progression to fusion and functional outcomes were noted. The patients were operated on between June 2020 and December 2021, they include 59 females and 22 males, the average age was 55.4 ± 17.3. Follow up was at least 6 months postoperative.

RESULTS

22 of the patients had previously underwent lumbar fusions. Follow up period ranged from 6 to 18 months. After radiofrequency ablation, 7 patients progressed to fusions, and 6 patients had to have the procedure done again to relieve their pain. Student t-test was used to compare between preoperative and postoperative values of NPRS (numerical pain rating score) and ODI (Oswestry disability index). It showed significance with P-value < 0.001 in both.

CONCLUSIONS

Sacroiliac joint radiofrequency ablation is a good option in the treatment of SI joint pain showing good results in the short term follow up period. It is a simple procedure that can be done in less than 30 min and is capable of providing significant pain relief for patients with sacroiliac joint dysfunction.

The efficacy of primary sacroiliac joint fusion for low back pain caused by sacroiliac joint pathology: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Conduct a systematic review to quantify the effect of primary sacroiliac joint fusion (SIJF) for the treatment of sacroiliac (SI) joint pathology on patient reported outcomes.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, Cochrane, PubMed, and Scopus databases were searched prior to August 18th, 2020 for all English-Language studies involving the treatment of SIJ pathology through SIJF and/or conservative management (CM). The quality of included studies was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Primary outcome measure was the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for low back pain. Secondary outcome measure was the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the incidence of adverse reactions.

RESULTS

A total of 564 patients and six studies were included. The overall quality of evidence analyzed by this review was low (GRADE = 0). Five out of the six studies were industry funded. The VAS standardized mean difference (SMD) between SIJF and CM at three months and six months follow-up was - 1.4 [95% confidence interval - 2.3, - 0.6] and - 1.5 [95% CI - 1.8, - 1.1]. The ODI SMD between SIJF and CM scores at three months and 6 months follow-up was - 0.9 [95% CI - 1.1, - 0.7] and - 1.1 [95% CI - 1.6, - 0.5]. The odds ratio of adverse reactions due to SIJF compared to CM was 1.9 [95% CI 0.1, 42.8].

CONCLUSION

Based on the limited number of independent trials with long-term follow-up, SIJF shows potential as a surgical treatment option for SIJ pathology.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION

CRD42020206149 (25th September 2020).

Sacral Dysmorphism Increases the Risk of Superior Gluteal Artery Injury in Percutaneous Sacroiliac Joint Fusion: Case Report and Literature Review

Sacroiliac (SI) joint dysfunction is a significant contributor to low back pain. Percutaneous SI joint fusion is a minimally invasive procedure that can provide excellent pain relief for patients, but it is not without complications, especially in patients with abnormal lumbosacral anatomy. We report the case of a 71-year-old man with sacral dysmorphism who had a painful SI joint that was refractory to conservative therapy. After undergoing an elective percutaneous SI joint fusion, he was discharged in stable condition. He returned in a delayed fashion with a large subgluteal hematoma. Imaging revealed disruption of a branch of the superior gluteal artery (SGA). Surgical exploration and ligation of the SGA were undertaken. Sacral dysmorphism affects SI joint fusion procedures by altering sacral anatomy and the safe zones for SI joint implants. Variations in lumbosacral anatomy can also alter the course of the SGA and adjacent nerves. Due to the wide prevalence of sacral dysmorphism, especially in the setting of low back pain, pre-surgical planning to avoid iatrogenic injuries must be considered with advanced imaging studies such as a computed tomography angiogram of the pelvis or catheter-based angiogram, or alternative surgical approaches to the SI joint must be taken.

Minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion using a novel hydroxyapatite-coated screw: final 2-year clinical and radiographic results

Background

The proper diagnosis and treatment of sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain remains a clinical challenge. Dysfunction of the SIJ can produce pain in the lower back, buttocks, and extremities. The present prospective clinical study is a follow-up report on a previous 1-year report on the use of a novel hydroxyapatite (HA)-coated titanium screw for the surgical treatment of SIJ dysfunction.

Methods

Data were prospectively collected on 32 consecutive patients who underwent minimally invasive SIJ fusion with a novel HA-coated screw. Clinical assessments and radiographs were collected and evaluated at 24 months postoperatively.

Results

Mean preoperative visual analog scale (VAS) back, left, and right leg pain scores decreased significantly to 20.0 (±18.4), 5.8 (±8.1), and 11.5 (±20.1) at 24-month follow-up, respectively. Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores significantly decreased to 27.5 (±18.8) points at 24 months (P<0.01). Two patients who required revision surgery reported improvement of their symptoms within 3 weeks and did not require subsequent surgery to be performed.

Conclusions

This study shows positive clinical and functional outcomes for patients who have undergone fusion using HA-coated screws for SIJ dysfunction. SIJ fusion using a HA-coated screw to treat SIJ dysfunction significantly decreased VAS back and leg pain and ODI scores at 2-year follow-up.

A Closer Look into the Association between the Sacroiliac Joint and Low Back Pain

INTRODUCTION

Low back pain is the most common type of global disability and annually costs the United States over two billion dollars. Opioids have been used to reduce low back pain, although current evidence concerning efficacy is lacking. Sacroiliac joint dysfunction (SIJD) is estimated to be a primary pain source of low back pain in between 10 and 25% of affected patients. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the rate of SIJD identified through osteopathic techniques in a convenience sample of patients seeking low back pain treatment. The secondary objective was to assess prevalence of low back pain and SIJD among different age groups, and genders.

METHODS

Retrospective chart reviews were completed the adult patients who had received osteopathic manipulative treatment for low back pain at Family Health and Wellness Center in Essexville, MI from January 2018 through June 2019. The prevalence of patients with SIJD was identified during reviews of osteopathic procedural documentation for patients seeking low back pain treatment. Data regarding patients’ age, sex, and treatment modalities were also extracted. Descriptive statistics consisting of frequencies and percentages were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 84 patient records were reviewed. A total of 51 (60.7%) patients seeking low back pain treatment were diagnosed with SIJD identified by osteopathic providers. This included patients with both lumbar and sacral diagnoses simultaneously. SIJD alone accounted for 26 (31%) of patients seeking treatment. Female patients were more likely to have SIJD involvement than males. Forty one (48.8%) treated patients were between 45-64 years old. Muscle Energy Technique was documented to be the most used for 68 (81%) patients. In addition, techniques tended to move from direct to indirect for older patients.

DISCUSSION

Our study demonstrated that SIJD appeared to contribute to low back pain in 51 (60.7%) of low back pain cases identified using osteopathic techniques. This is much greater than the previously reported percentages of 10 to 25%. One possible confounding influence included varied resident screening and reporting of sacral dysfunction. Since multiple areas of the body can be treated at one time, our current procedure notes did not allow for distinguishing between which types of modalities were used on each region or capture residents’ preferred treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Although further studies are needed, our results suggest that knowledge of SIJD’s impact on low back pain could lead to improved patient outcomes such as decreased medical costs and opioid use.

Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion: The Current Evidence

Background

Fusion of the sacroiliac (SI) joint as a treatment for low back pain remains controversial. The purpose of this manuscript is to review the current literature and clinical outcomes of SI joint fusion surgery.

Methods

We conducted a literature review and included studies with the term "sacroiliac joint fusion" that had at least 12 months of clinical follow-up, reported on minimally invasive techniques, and included patient-reported outcome measures.

Results

Two approach types (dorsal and lateral) and numerous different implant manufacturers were identified. Most studies included level 4 data, with a small number of level 2 prospective cohort studies and 2 prospective level 1 studies. Every reviewed study reported clinical benefit in terms of improved pain scores or improvement in validated disability measures. Complication rates were low.

Conclusions

Minimally invasive SI joint fusion provides clinically significant improvement in pain scores and disability in most patients, across multiple studies and implant manufacturers.

Level of Evidence

5.

Clinical Relevance

Emerging evidence in support of SI joint fusion indicates that clinicians should examine the SI joint and include SI joint pain in their differential diagnosis for low back pain patients.

Reliability and validity of a new clinical test for assessment of the sacroiliac joint dysfunction

Background:

Dysfunctional sacroiliac joint (SIJ) has been cited as a source of low backache (LBA). Numerous non-invasive clinical tests are available for its assessment having poor validity and reliability which challenges their clinical utility. Thus, introduction of a new clinical test may be necessary.

Objective:

To assess reliability and validity of a new clinical test for the assessment of patients with SIJ movement dysfunction.

Methods:

Forty-five subjects (23 having LBA of SIJ origin and 22 healthy asymptomatic volunteers) with mean age 28.62 +∕− 5.26 years were assessed by 2 blinded examiners for 3 different clinical tests of SIJ, including the new test. The obtained values were assessed for reliability by intraclass correlation, kappa coefficient and percentage agreement. Validity was assessed by averaging sensitivity and specificity. Positive and negative predictive values and accuracy were assessed.

Results:

The new test demonstrates good intra- (r=0.81) and inter-rater (r=0.82) reliability with substantial agreement between raters (k>0.60). It has 79.9% validity, 82% sensitivity, 77% specificity, 79% positive-predictive, 80% negative-predictive value and accuracy.

Conclusion:

The new “Shimpi Prone SIJ test” has a good intra- and inter-rater reliability with a substantial rater agreement and a good validity and accuracy for the assessment of patients with SIJ movement dysfunction.

The efficacy and safety of using cooled radiofrequency in treating chronic sacroiliac joint pain: A PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Cooled radiofrequency procedure is a novel minimally invasive surgical technique and has been occasionally utilized in managing chronic sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain. A meta-analysis was conducted to systematically assess the efficacy and safety of using cooled radiofrequency in treating patients with chronic SIJ pain in terms of pain and disability relief, patients' satisfaction degree as well as complications.

METHODS

Studies of using cooled radiofrequency procedure in managing SIJ pain were retrieved from Medline and Web of Science according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Quality evaluation was conducted using Cochrane collaboration tool for randomized controlled trials and MINORS quality assessment for noncomparative trials. Statistics were managed using Review Manager 5.3.

RESULTS

Totally 7 studies with 240 eligible patients were enrolled. The overall pooled results demonstrated that pain intensity decreased significantly after cooled radiofrequency procedure compared with that measured before treatment. The mean difference (MD) was 3.81 [95% confidence intervals (95% CIs): 3.29-4.33, P < .001] and 3.78 (95% CIs: 3.31-4.25, P < .001) as measured by the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS), respectively. Disability also relieved significantly after treatment compared with that measured before treatment. The MD was 18.2 (95% CIs: 12.22-24.17, P < .001) as measured by the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Seventy-two percent of the patients presented positive results as measured by the Global Perceived Effect (GPE). The OR was 0.01 (95% CIs: 0.00-0.05, P < .001). Only mild complications were observed in the 7 studies, including transient hip pain, soreness, and numbness.

CONCLUSION

Cooled radiofrequency procedure can significantly relieve pain and disability with no severe complications, and majority of patients are satisfied with this technique. Thus, it is safe and effective to use this procedure in managing patients with chronic SIJ pain. More high-quality and large-scale randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are required to validate our findings.

LIMITATIONS

The sample size of the included studies was small and various heterogeneity existed.

Two-Year Outcomes from a Randomized Controlled Trial of Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion vs. Non-Surgical Management for Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction

BACKGROUND

Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) dysfunction is an important and underappreciated cause of chronic low back pain.

OBJECTIVE

To prospectively and concurrently compare outcomes after surgical and non-surgical treatment for chronic SIJ dysfunction.

METHODS

One hundred and forty-eight subjects with SIJ dysfunction were randomly assigned to minimally invasive SIJ fusion with triangular titanium implants (SIJF, n = 102) or non-surgical management (NSM, n = 46). SIJ pain (measured with a 100-point visual analog scale, VAS), disability (measured with Oswestry Disability Index, ODI) and quality of life scores were collected at baseline and at scheduled visits to 24 months. Crossover from non-surgical to surgical care was allowed after the 6-month study visit was complete. Improvements in continuous measures were compared using repeated measures analysis of variance. The proportions of subjects with clinical improvement (SIJ pain improvement ≥20 points, ODI ≥15 points) and substantial clinical benefit (SIJ pain improvement ≥25 points or SIJ pain rating ≤35, ODI ≥18.8 points) were compared.

RESULTS

In the SIJF group, mean SIJ pain improved rapidly and was sustained (mean improvement of 55.4 points) at month 24. The 6-month mean change in the NSM group (12.2 points) was substantially smaller than that in the SIJF group (by 38.3 points, p<.0001 for superiority). By month 24, 83.1% and 82.0% received either clinical improvement or substantial clinical benefit in VAS SIJ pain score. Similarly, 68.2% and 65.9% had received clinical improvement or substantial clinical benefit in ODI score at month 24. In the NSM group, these proportions were <10% with non-surgical treatment only. Parallel changes were seen for EQ-5D and SF-36, with larger changes in the surgery group at 6 months compared to NSM. The rate of adverse events related to SIJF was low and only 3 subjects assigned to SIJF underwent revision surgery within the 24-month follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

In this Level 1 multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial, minimally invasive SIJF with triangular titanium implants provided larger improvements in pain, disability and quality of life compared to NSM. Improvements after SIJF persisted to 24 months. This study was approved by a local or central IRB before any subjects were enrolled. All patients provided study-specific informed consent prior to participation.

Work intensity in sacroiliac joint fusion and lumbar microdiscectomy

Background

The evidence base supporting minimally invasive sacroiliac (SI) joint fusion (SIJF) surgery is increasing. The work relative value units (RVUs) associated with minimally invasive SIJF are seemingly low. To date, only one published study describes the relative work intensity associated with minimally invasive SIJF. No study has compared work intensity vs other commonly performed spine surgery procedures.

Methods

Charts of 192 patients at five sites who underwent either minimally invasive SIJF (American Medical Association [AMA] CPT® code 27279) or lumbar microdiscectomy (AMA CPT® code 63030) were reviewed. Abstracted were preoperative times associated with diagnosis and patient care, intraoperative parameters including operating room (OR) in/out times and procedure start/stop times, and postoperative care requirements. Additionally, using a visual analog scale, surgeons estimated the intensity of intraoperative care, including mental, temporal, and physical demands and effort and frustration. Work was defined as operative time multiplied by task intensity.

Results

Patients who underwent minimally invasive SIJF were more likely female. Mean procedure times were lower in SIJF by about 27.8 minutes (P<0.0001) and mean total OR times were lower by 27.9 minutes (P<0.0001), but there was substantial overlap across procedures. Mean preservice and post-service total labor times were longer in minimally invasive SIJF (preservice times longer by 63.5 minutes [P<0.0001] and post-service labor times longer by 20.2 minutes [P<0.0001]). The number of postoperative visits was higher in minimally invasive SIJF. Mean total service time (preoperative + OR time + postoperative) was higher in the minimally invasive SIJF group (261.5 vs 211.9 minutes, P<0.0001). Intraoperative intensity levels were higher for mental, physical, effort, and frustration domains (P<0.0001 each). After taking into account intensity, intraoperative workloads showed substantial overlap.

Conclusion

Compared to a commonly performed lumbar spine surgical procedure, lumbar microdiscectomy, that currently has a higher work RVU, preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative workload for minimally invasive SIJF is higher. The work RVU for minimally invasive SIJF should be adjusted upward as the relative amount of work is comparable.

Durable intermediate-to long-term outcomes after minimally invasive transiliac sacroiliac joint fusion using triangular titanium implants

BACKGROUND

Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) fusion (SIJF), first performed 95 years ago, has become an increasingly accepted surgical option for chronic SIJ dysfunction. Few studies have reported intermediate- or long-term outcomes after SIJF.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to determine patient-based outcomes after SIJF for chronic SIJ dysfunction due to degenerative sacroiliitis or SIJ disruption at ≥3 years of follow-up.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent SIJF prior to December 2012 were contacted over phone or through email. Participants completed questionnaires in clinic, over phone or by email, regarding SIJ pain, activities related to SIJ dysfunction, and the Oswestry Disability Index. Charts were reviewed to extract baseline parameters and the clinical course of follow-up.

RESULTS

One hundred seven patients were eligible and participated in this study. Mean (standard deviation) preoperative SIJ pain score was 7.5 (1.7). At mean follow-up of 3.7 years, the mean SIJ pain score was 2.6 (representing a 4.8-point improvement from baseline, P<0.0001) and the mean Oswestry Disability Index was 28.2. The ability to perform activities commonly impaired by SIJ dysfunction showed positive improvements in most patients. SIJ revision surgery was uncommon (five patients, 4.7%). Fourteen patients (13.1%) underwent contralateral SIJF during follow-up, 25.2% of patients had additional non-SIJ-related lumbar spine or hip surgeries during follow-up.

CONCLUSION

In intermediate- to long-term follow-up, minimally invasive transiliac SIJF was associated with improved pain, low disability scores, and improved ability to perform activities of daily living.