Fluoroscopic Findings of Extra-Cervical Facet Joint Flow and Its Incidence on Cervical Facet Joint Arthrograms

The Fluoroscopic-Guided Cervical Transarticular Epidural Steroid Injection

ABSTRACT

The epidural space is commonly accessed via an interlaminar or transforaminal approach to administer corticosteroids for radicular pain. An alternative is a transarticular approach, which may be considered when conventional access to the epidural space is either not desired or contraindicated. This approach has been described in the cervical spine using computed tomography guidance but not fluoroscopic guidance. We describe a cervical transarticular approach to the epidural space under fluoroscopy and review the computed tomography-guided literature. The risks of transarticular epidural injections are likely low given that when performed prudently, they avoid direct contact with the vertebral artery, spinal medullary arteries, venous plexus, spinal cord, and nerve roots.

Facet Joint Versus Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injections in Patients With Cervical Radicular Pain due to Foraminal Stenosis: A Retrospective Comparative Study

BACKGROUND

A cervical transforaminal epidural (TFE) steroid injection is a useful treatment option for cervical radicular pain, but it carries a small risk of catastrophic complications. Several studies have reported that cervical facet joint (FJ) steroid injection can reduce cervical radicular pain through an indirect epidural spread. The aim of this retrospective comparative study was to evaluate the pain scores and functional disability in subjects receiving cervical FJ or TFE steroid injection for the treatment of cervical radicular pain due to foraminal stenosis (FS).

METHODS

We selected 278 patients 18 years of age and older who underwent cervical FJ (n = 130) or TFE (n= 148) steroid injection for cervical radicular pain. The primary outcomes included pain scores and functional disability during hospital visits one, three, and six months after the initial injection. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of responders and Medication Quantification Scale (MQS) scores. Adverse events and variables correlating with effectiveness one month after the initial injection were also evaluated.

RESULTS

The Numeric Rating Scale and Neck Disability Index scores showed a significant improvement one, three, and six months after the initial injection in both groups, with no significant differences between the groups. No significant differences were observed in the success rates of the procedure one, three, and six months after the initial injection for either group. There were no significant differences in MQS between the groups during the follow-up period. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses revealed that the injection method, age, sex, number of injections, FS severity, MQS, pain duration, and the presence of cervical disc herniation were not independent predictors of treatment success.

CONCLUSION

The efficacy of FJ steroid injection may not be inferior to that of TFE steroid injection in patients with cervical radicular pain due to FS.

Consensus practice guidelines on interventions for cervical spine (facet) joint pain from a multispecialty international working group

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.

Consensus practice guidelines on interventions for cervical spine (facet) joint pain from a multispecialty international working group

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.