Diagnosing Sacroiliac Joint Pain

Clinical information on imaging referrals for suspected or known axial spondyloarthritis: recommendations from the Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society (ASAS)

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to establish expert consensus recommendations for clinical information on imaging requests in suspected/known axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), focusing on enhancing diagnostic clarity and patient care through guidelines.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A specialised task force was formed, comprising 7 radiologists, 11 rheumatologists from the Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society (ASAS) and a patient representative. Using the Delphi method, two rounds of surveys were conducted among ASAS members. These surveys aimed to identify critical elements for imaging referrals and to refine these elements for practical application. The task force deliberated on the survey outcomes and proposed a set of recommendations, which were then presented to the ASAS community for a decisive vote.

RESULTS

The collaborative effort resulted in a set of six detailed recommendations for clinicians involved in requesting imaging for patients with suspected or known axSpA. These recommendations cover crucial areas, including clinical features indicative of axSpA, clinical features, mechanical factors, past imaging data, potential contraindications for specific imaging modalities or contrast media and detailed reasons for the examination, including differential diagnoses. Garnering support from 73% of voting ASAS members, these recommendations represent a consensus on optimising imaging request protocols in axSpA.

CONCLUSION

The ASAS recommendations offer comprehensive guidance for rheumatologists in requesting imaging for axSpA, aiming to standardise requesting practices. By improving the precision and relevance of imaging requests, these guidelines should enhance the clinical impact of radiology reports, facilitate accurate diagnosis and consequently improve the management of patients with axSpA.

Serratia Sacroiliitis Secondary to Intravenous Drug Use: A Case Report

Serratia spp. are ubiquitous, opportunistic, and infectious organisms that have historically been known to infect the upper respiratory, urinary, and circulatory systems. This manuscript presents the case of a 35-year-old White female with a past medical history of polysubstance abuse, intravenous drug use (IVDU), and poor dentition who was admitted to a community hospital with complaints of lower back pain for 10 days following the recent completion of treatment for a suspected epidural abscess. Per her report, her last IVDU with fentanyl was 11 days prior, and she admitted to using various sources of water to inject her drugs. Magnetic resonance imaging with contrast was significant for possible infectious sacroiliitis, and blood cultures grew Serratia marcescens. Due to this patient's extensive IVDU history, in-patient ceftriaxone was chosen over discharging the patient with a peripherally inserted central catheter line. Serratia spp.bacteremia with concomitant septic sacroiliitis in the setting of IVDU is an extremely rare presentation. Due to the nonspecific presentation of sacroiliitis, multidrug resistance profile of Serratia spp., and high mortality rate associated with S. marcescens sepsis, early detection and diagnosis is paramount in similar patients with extensive risk factors.

The effects of Core Stability Exercises and Mulligan's mobilization with movement techniques on sacroiliac joint dysfunction

Purpose

Sacroiliac joint dysfunction (SIJD), while being the primary contributor to low back pain, is still disregarded and treated as low back pain. Mulligan's Mobilization with Movement (MWM) Techniques and Core Stability Exercises (CSE) are often used to treat low back pain. There is not much evidence that it is effective in SIJD. To evaluate the effectiveness of CSE coupled with MWM (CSE + MWM) in the treatment of SIJD.

Methods

39 patients with SIJD were recruited and randomly divided into distinct groups as follows: control group (n = 13), CSE group (n = 13) and CSE + MWM group (n = 13). The Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), the Range of Motion (ROM), the Pressure Pain Threshold (PPT) and the pelvic tilt angle asymmetry ratio in the sagittal plane (PTAR) were used to gauge the intervention's success both before (M0) and after (M1) it. All experimental data were statistically analyzed.

Results

The SIJ-related pain metric significantly decreased in both the CSE + MWM group and the CSE group between M0 and M1, as determined by the NPRS and RMDQ. Between M0 and M1, The CSE group's left axial rotation ROM and lumbar flexion ROM were significantly decreased. The CSE + MWM group's extension ROM and left lateral flexion ROM both significantly increased between M0 and M1. In the difference variable (M1-M0), the CSE + MWM group substantially outperformed control group in the left lateral flexion ROM and outperformed the CSE group in the left axial rotation ROM.

Conclusion

In individuals with SIJD, CSE + MWM is beneficial in lowering pain, disability, and function. Treatment with CSE and MWM approaches for SIJ appears to boost this efficacy.

Acute back pain: Clinical and radiologic diagnosis: WFNS spine committee recommendations

Objective

To formulate the most current, evidence-based recommendations for the clinical and radiologic diagnosis of acute low back pain lasting <4 weeks.

Methods

A systematic literature search in PubMed and Google Scholar databases was performed from 2012 to 2022 using the search terms "acute back pain AND clinical diagnosis" and "acute back pain AND radiologic diagnosis". Screening criteria resulted in a total of 97 papers analyzed. Using the Delphi method and two rounds of voting, the WFNS (World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies) Spine Committee generated ten final consensus statements.

Results

Ten final consensus statements address the clinical diagnosis of acute LBP, including which clinical conditions cause acute LBP and how we can distinguish between the different causes of LBP, including discogenic, facet joint, sacroiliac joint, and myofascial pain. The most important step for the radiologic diagnosis of acute LBP is to evaluate the necessity of radiologic investigation, as well as its timing and the most appropriate type of imaging modality. Importantly, imaging should not be a routine diagnostic tool, unless red flag signs are present. In fact, routine imaging for acute LBP can actually have a negative effect as it may reveal incidental radiographic findings that exacerbate patient fear and anxiety.

Conclusion

Overall, the quality of evidence is not high for most of our consensus statements, and further studies are needed to validate the WFNS Spine Committee recommendations on the clinical and radiographic diagnosis of acute LBP.

Hydroxyapatite-Coated Screws Versus Titanium Triangular Dowels for Sacroiliac Joint Fusion: Results From a Nonrandomized Prospective Outcome Study

OBJECTIVE

This is a single-surgeon series that prospectively evaluates the results of sacroiliac joint (SIJ) fusion for patients with SIJ dysfunction using hydroxyapatite-coated screws (HACSs) compared with titanium triangular dowels (TTDs).

METHODS

A total of 113 patients underwent SIJ fusion surgery between 2013 and 2018 at the University Hospital Llandough to treat symptomatic SIJ dysfunction not responding to nonoperative measures. Of the 113 patients, 40 were treated with HACSs and 73 with TTDs. Patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) were collected preoperatively and at 12 months postoperatively, including the 36-item short-form health survey, Oswestry disability index, EuroQol-5D-5L, and Majeed pelvic score. Patients with ongoing symptoms were followed up beyond the study period.

RESULTS

Of the 113 patients, 33 completed follow-up in the HACS group compared with 61 in the TTD group. Both groups had comparable preoperative PROMs; however, the postoperative PROMs were significantly better in the TTD group. Additionally, 21 patients (63%) in the HACS group had radiological evidence of screw lysis compared with 5 patients (9%) in the TTD group. A subgroup analysis revealed less significant improvement in PROMs for patients with screw lysis compared with those without. Four patients were offered further revision surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive SIJ fusion has been shown to have good clinical outcomes for select patients. However, our experience shows that HACSs are associated with a high rate of screw lysis and poorer patient outcomes compared with TTDs. Therefore, we recommend the use of TTDs instead of HACSs for SIJ fusion surgery.

Return to Duty in Military Service Members Following Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion

INTRODUCTION

As the utilization of minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion (SIJF) continues to expand, a better understanding of postoperative outcomes is needed, particularly in young and active individuals. The purpose of this study is to assess the outcomes of this procedure in an active duty military population by examining return-to-duty (RTD) rates.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of the electronic medical record from a tertiary military medical center was performed for active duty service members undergoing SIJF from January 2013 to January 2019. The primary outcome measured was RTD at 6 months, with active duty status at 1 year, last follow-up, and revision surgery as secondary outcomes. Demographic and surgical variables recorded included patient age, gender, military rank, utilization of navigation, and implant type.

RESULTS

Sixteen service members met the inclusion criteria, with a mean age of 40.5 ± 6.7 years. The mean follow-up after surgery was 24 ± 15 months. Patients received either cylindrical (n = 6) or triangular (n = 10) implants placed with (n = 6) or without (n = 10) navigation. Within 6 months of surgery, 56% of patients were able to RTD. Patients undergoing navigation-assisted procedures were significantly more likely to RTD at 6 months (100% vs. 30%, P = .011) compared to those undergoing surgery performed with orthogonal fluoroscopic imaging. Compared to those with cylindrical implants, patients with triangular implants were also more likely to RTD at 6 months (80% vs. 17%, P = .035).

CONCLUSIONS

Following SIJF, a small majority of service members were able to return to full active duty status by 6 months. Further studies are needed to assess the potential benefits of navigation and implant selection, as our retrospective review noted differences in outcomes based on these variables.

Multimodal management strategies for chronic pain after spinal surgery: a comprehensive review

"Chronic pain after spinal surgery" (CPSS) is a nonspecific term for cases in which the end result of surgery generally does not meet the preoperative expectations of the patient and surgeon. This term has replaced the previous term i.e., failed back surgery syndrome. CPSS is challenging for both patients and doctors. Despite advancements in surgical techniques and technologies, a subset of patients continue to experience persistent or recurrent pain postoperatively. This review provides an overview of the multimodal management for CPSS, ranging from conservative management to revision surgery. Drawing on recent research and clinical experience, we aimed to offer insights into the diverse strategies available to improve the quality of life of CPSS patients.

Improved Outcomes with Concurrent Instrumentation and Fusion of the Sacroiliac Joint in Patients with Long Lumbosacral Constructs

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE

Spinal fusion, specifically constructs connected to pelvic bones, has been consistently reported as a predisposing factor to sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain. The aim of this study is to compare SIJ outcomes in patients with constructs to the pelvis following instrumentation vs instrumentation plus fusion of the SIJ.

METHODS

Data of study subjects was extracted from a prospectively maintained database as well as retrospectively collected from records at a tertiary academic medical center in the United States between 2018 and 2020.

RESULTS

A cohort of 103 patients was divided into 2 groups: 65 in Group 1 [S2AI screw without fusion device] and 38 in Group 2 [S2AI screw with fusion device]. None of the patients in Group 2 developed postoperative SIJ pain compared to 44.6% in Group 1. Sacroiliac joint fusion occurred in all Group 2 but none of Group 1 patients. The postoperative Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for lower extremity (LE) pain (.8 vs .5; P = .03) and postoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) (18.7 vs 14.2; P < .01) were significantly higher in Group 1. The rate of distal junctional break, failure, and/or kyphosis (DJBFK) and time to DJBFK were not significantly different between the two groups, and the rate of DJBFK did not change in the presence of multiple covariates.

CONCLUSION

The SIJs carry the heavy load of long lumbosacral fusion constructs extending to the pelvis. Simultaneous SIJ instrumentation and fusion decreases the risk of disability, prevents the development of postoperative SIJ pain, and may also protect the S2AI screw from loosening and failure.

Nationwide Analysis of Sacroiliac Joint Fusion Trends: Regional Variations in Utilization and Population Characteristics

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Retrospective cohort analysis.

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluates utilization and demographic trends for sacroiliac joint (SIJ) fusions across the United States (US).

METHODS

Patients who underwent SIJ fusion from 2010-2021 were identified within the PearlDiver national database using International Classification of Disease (ICD-9, ICD-10) and Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. Indications for trauma, malignancy, or infection were excluded. Demographic, clinical, and procedure characteristics were recorded along with annual utilization rates. Annual percent change (APC) was calculated to identify increasing or decreasing utilization from prior years. Negative binomial regression was performed to project subsequent utilization for 2022-2028. Chi-squared analysis followed by post-hoc comparisons were used to compare differences in diagnostic indications and clinical features associated with SIJ fusion across regions. Bonferroni adjustments were applied to P-values for pairwise analyses.

RESULTS

Overall, 18 032 patients (69.8% female, mean age = 51.0 + 13.4 years) underwent SIJ fusion between 2010 and 2021. Annual utilization increased by 33.5% on average. The South comprised the largest proportion of cases (48.9%). Projections for 2022-2028 predict continued growth in procedures, with an overall increase of 1100% from 1350 cases in 2021 to 16 195 by end of 2028. Spondyloarthropathy-induced sacroilitis was the most prevalent diagnostic indication nationwide (51%). Of patients undergoing SIJ fusion, 18% had a prior lumbar fusion, and only 45% received a preoperative diagnostic SIJ injection.

CONCLUSION

As SIJ fusion is increasingly utilized to treat refractory SIJ-based pain, establishing evidence-based guidelines, improving diagnostic strategies, and defining indications are imperative to support growing applications within clinical practice.

Ultrasound-guided intra-sacroiliac joint injection — methylprednisolone versus triamcinolone: a randomized comparative study

Background

The sacroiliac joint (SIJ) has been considered as a pain generator in about 10% to 25% of patients with leg or low back pain. The current study was conducted to compare the effectiveness of ultrasound-guided intra-articular SIJ injection of methylprednisolone versus triamcinolone acetonide according to postinjection pain relief, the random blood glucose (RBG) level in diabetic patients, quality of life (QoL), patient’s satisfaction, and the analgesic requirement.

Results

NRS was better at rest and at motion in MTP groups 3 (2–3) and 4 (3–5) compared to TMC groups 4 (3–5) and 5 (3–6) at 2 weeks after injection with statistically significant difference P equal 0.025 and 0.036, respectively, while there was no statistically significant difference between the studied groups at 1, 2, and 3 months after injection. The RBG level was higher in the MTP group in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd days after injection 206 (168–308), 245 (200–385), and 215 (179–343) compared to the TMC group 170 (136–271), 168 (119–233), and 166 (110–253) with statistically significant difference P equal 0.066, 0.045, and 0.049, respectively. However, there was no statistically significant difference in the RBG level at baseline, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th days after injection between the two studied groups. Moreover, there was a statistically significant elevation in the RBG level within the MTP group in the first 3 days compared to the baseline (P ˂ 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference according to QoL, patient’s satisfaction, and the analgesic requirement between both groups.

Conclusions

SIJ injection with methylprednisolone or triamcinolone acetonide showed an improvement in pain score, while the MTP group was better in NRS at 2 weeks. Also, the RBG level in diabetic patients was higher in the MTP group in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd days after injection. There was upgrading in QoL, similarity in patient’s satisfaction, and reducing the use of analgesia with no statistically significant difference between the studied groups.

Image-Guided Spine Interventions for Pain: Ongoing Controversies

An expanding array of image-guided spine interventions have the potential to provide immediate and effective pain relief. Innovations in spine intervention have proceeded rapidly, with clinical adoption of new techniques at times occurring before the development of bodies of evidence to establish efficacy. Although new spine interventions have been evaluated by clinical trials, acceptance of results has been hindered by controversies regarding trial methodology. This article explores controversial aspects of four categories of image-guided interventions for painful conditions: spine interventions for postdural puncture headache resulting from prior lumbar procedures, epidural steroid injections for cervical and lumbar radiculopathy, interventions for facet and sacroiliac joint pain, and vertebral augmentations for compression fractures. For each intervention, we summarize the available literature, with an emphasis on persistent controversies, and discuss how current areas of disagreement and challenge may shape future research and innovation. Despite the ongoing areas of debate regarding various aspects of these procedures, effective treatments continue to emerge and show promise for aiding relief of a range of debilitating conditions.

YouTube as a source of information on sacroiliac joint injection: A reliability and quality analysis

Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) injection is recommended for both diagnosis and relief of SIJ pain. YouTube has become a widely used source for health professionals and patients to obtain information about various procedures but the quality of YouTube videos including medical content is questionable. Therefore, the aim of this study is to evaluate the quality of SIJ injection videos on YouTube. This cross-sectional study was conducted through March 2022 by searching the phrase "sacroiliac joint injection" on YouTube. After resetting search history top 100 videos were screened. Duration of videos, number of views, number of likes, number of comments, view ratio (number of views/d), time passed since upload date, guide used for injection, and source of videos were recorded. The DISCERN and the Global Quality Scale were used to assess the quality and reliability of the videos. Of the 100 videos screened 42 videos met the inclusion criteria. The videos (73.8%) were predominantly uploaded by physicians. Most frequently used guide for injections was ultrasound with 45.4%. According to the DISCERN classification, 35.7% of the videos were "very poor," 30.9% were "poor," 21.4% were "fair," 7.1% were "good" and 4.7% were "excellent." Physicians and patients should be aware of that many of the videos about SIJ injections are categorized as "poor" or "very poor," which means they may mislead trainees, resulting in inadequate treatments.

Incidence of sacroiliac joint pain after lumbosacral spine fusion: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To determine the incidence of sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain after lumbosacral spinal fusion.

BACKGROUND

Persistent low back pain is a potential source of disability and poor outcomes following lumbar spine fusion. The SIJ has been described as a potential source. However, there is a paucity of data concerning its importance.

METHODS

This is a PROSPERO registered systematic review. A systematic search of the English literature was performed in Medline, Embase and Cochrane Library databases. MeSH terms such as Lumbar vertebrae, Sacrum, Spinal Fusion, Pain, Sacrum, Ligaments, Sacroiliac Joint were utilized for the search. Key words such as "sacroiliac dysfunction.mp." and "sacroiliac complex.mp." were utilized for the search. Two independent reviewers reviewed articles to determine eligibility for final review and analysis. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to appraise the quality of all nonrandomized observational studies. Inverse variance weighting with random effects was used to pool data. The GRADE approach, PRISMA workflow and checklists was performed.

RESULTS

Twelve studies were included. All studies were observational and of moderate to low quality. The pooled incidence of sacroiliac joint pain was 15.8%. The pooled incidence of SIJ pain for patients without fusion extending to the sacrum was 15.8%. The pooled incidence of SIJ pain for patients with fusion extending to the sacrum was 32.9%. There was high heterogeneity.

CONCLUSION

SIJ pain is a potential cause of persistent pain after lumbar spine surgery. The current literature of poor quality. Patients presenting with pain after lumbosacral spine fusion should be evaluated for SIJ related pain.

Biportal Endoscopic Radiofrequency Ablation of the Sacroiliac Joint Complex in the Treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain: A Technical Note with 1-Year Follow-Up

BACKGROUND

Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain is a common source of low back pain. Previously reported management strategies for this pain include conservative treatment, SIJ injection, radiofrequency denervation ablation, and SIJ fusion. Herein, we describe the use of biportal endoscopic radiofrequency ablation (BERA) to treat patients with low back pain.

METHODS

We included 16 patients who underwent BERA from April 2018 to June 2020. We marked the S1, S2, and S3 foramina and the SIJ line under fluoroscopy. Skin entry points were positioned at 0.5 cm medial to the SIJ line and at the level of the S1 and S2 foramina. Under local anesthesia, we introduced a 30° arthroscope with a 4 mm diameter through the viewing portal; surgical instruments were inserted through another caudal working portal. We ablated the lateral branches of the S1-S3 foramina and L5 dorsal ramus, which were the sources of SIJ pain.

RESULTS

Clinically relevant improvements in both visual analog scale and Oswestry Disability Index scores were noted at 1-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up time points after surgery. The overall patient satisfaction score was 89.1%.

CONCLUSIONS

BERA for SIJ pain treatment has the advantage of directly identifying and ablating the innervating nerve to the joint. Through this technique, an expanded working angle can be obtained compared with traditional single-port endoscopy. Our study demonstrated promising preliminary results.

Posterior Oblique Approach for Sacroiliac Joint Fusion

Introduction Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain is a common source of low back pain. Though this condition can be treated with conservative measures, there is a subset of patients who fail to respond to conservative treatment. For them, surgical treatment using minimally invasive techniques could be considered. There are currently a number of SIJ fixation methods described. However, there is no case series reported on posterior oblique approach. Therefore, in this paper, the authors report their experience with the Sacrix system via the posterior oblique approach. Method In this series, 19 patients aged 44-84 years, with a median of 58 years, underwent SIJ fusion using this technique. This is a posterior oblique approach in which two screws are inserted into the ilium through the posterior part of the iliac crest and then advanced into the sacrum through the SIJ. Results The follow-up is between 7 and 30 months, with a median of 12 months. Eighteen patients had excellent pain relief. There was no complication from the procedure, and the blood loss was minimal. All eight patients who had follow-up radiographs showed solid fusion. Conclusion Posterior oblique approach for SIJ fusion is a minimally invasive procedure that proved to be effective and safe in this series. It also resulted in solid radiographic fusion, decreased pain, and improved function.

[Modern aspects to the diagnosis and non-surgical treatment of low back pain]

Low back pain is one of the most common complaints in primary care. This pain is usually nonspecific and musculoskeletal. However, identification and exclusion of specific causes of pain as early as possible are important for specialists since their underestimation can sometimes lead to life-threatening consequences. The authors analyze literature data on the key facts of anamnesis («red flags»), management of patients with low back pain with emphasis on modern concepts and recommendations for diagnostics, identifying the dominant nature and cause of pain, differential diagnosis, and diagnostic significance of neuroimaging. Special attention is paid to existing options for conservative (drug and non-drug therapy) and interventional treatment methods, which have become increasingly popular in recent years.

Magnetic resonance imaging findings related to sacroiliac joint pain in high-performance athletes

BACKGROUND

Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) dysfunction in athletes affects competitiveness. However, the pathology and imaging features have not been clarified.

OBJECTIVE

To clarify the association between SIJ pain and MRI findings in high-performance athletes.

METHODS

Fifty-two Japanese high-performance athletes with or without SIJ pain were recruited. MRI short tau inversion recovery (STIR) semi-coronal and semi-axial images of their SIJs were taken. The relationships between high-signal changes in MRI-STIR and SIJ pain and pain duration were investigated. Six athletes with continuous SIJ pain were prospectively followed.

RESULTS

The proportion of athletes with high-signal changes in the SIJ was significantly higher among athletes with SIJ pain for one month or more (76.9%, 10/13) than among athletes with SIJ pain for less than one month (18.2%, 2/11) and among athletes without SIJ pain (28.6%, 8/28). High-signal changes on painful SIJs were most often present in the sacrum. In three of the six athletes who were prospectively followed, the high-signal area and intensity on MRI both diminished as their symptoms improved.

CONCLUSIONS

High-signal changes of the SIJ on MRI-STIR images in high-performance athletes may reflect their SIJ pain.

What You Need to Know About Sacroiliac Dysfunction

Low back pain is the leading cause of disability worldwide, and sacroiliac dysfunction is estimated to occur in 15%-30% of those with nonspecific low back pain. Nurses are in the unique position to support and provide education to patients who may be experiencing sacroiliac dysfunction or possibly apply this knowledge to themselves, as low back pain is a significant problem experienced by nurses. A patient's clinical presentation, including pain patterns and characteristics, functional limitations, common etiologies and musculoskeletal system involvement, current diagnostic tools, and realm of treatments, are discussed along with their respective efficacy. Distinction is made between specific diagnosis and treatment of joint involvement and that of sacroiliac regional pain, as well as other factors that play a role in diagnosis and treatment for the reader's consideration.

Sacroiliitis: A Review on Anatomy, Diagnosis, and Treatment

Introduction

Sacroiliitis is an inflammation of one or both of the sacroiliac (SI) joints, most often resulting pain in the lower back that can extend down the legs. Pain arising from the SI joint can be difficult to diagnose and treat due to the intricate surrounding ligamentous structure, nerve innervation, and its role in transferring weight from the upper body to the lower limbs. SI joint dysfunction accounts for up to 25% of cases of lower back pain and has a debilitating effect on patient functionality. This review aims to provide comprehensive coverage of all aspects of SI joint pain, with a specific focus on differential diagnosis and treatment.

Methods

Current literature on SI joint pain and inflammation, other etiologies of lower back pain, and new treatment options were compiled using the databases PubMed and Cochrane and used to write this comprehensive review. There were no restrictions when conducting the literature search with regard to publication date, study language, or study type.

Results

The diagnosis protocol of SI joint pain arising from sacroiliitis usually begins with the presentation of lower back pain and confirmatory diagnostic testing through fluoroscopy joint block. Reduction in pain following the anesthetic is considered the golden standard for diagnosis. The treatment begins with the conservative approach of physical therapy and analgesics for symptom relief. However, refractory cases often require interventional methods such as corticosteroid injections, prolotherapy, radiofrequency ablation, and even SI joint fusion surgery.

Conclusion

SI joint pain is a complex problem that can present with varying patterns of pain due to uncertainty regarding its innervation and its prominent surrounding structure. It is therefore especially important to obtain a thorough history and physical on top of diagnostic tests such as a diagnostic block to properly identify the source of pain. Conservative treatment options with physical therapy and analgesics should be attempted first before interventional strategies such as ablation, injections, and prolotherapy can be considered. SI joint fusion surgery is a solution to cases in which previous methods do not provide significant relief.

The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) Evidence-Based Clinical Guideline of Interventional Treatments for Low Back Pain

Introduction

Painful lumbar spinal disorders represent a leading cause of disability in the US and worldwide. Interventional treatments for lumbar disorders are an effective treatment for the pain and disability from low back pain. Although many established and emerging interventional procedures are currently available, there exists a need for a defined guideline for their appropriateness, effectiveness, and safety.

Objective

The ASPN Back Guideline was developed to provide clinicians the most comprehensive review of interventional treatments for lower back disorders. Clinicians should utilize the ASPN Back Guideline to evaluate the quality of the literature, safety, and efficacy of interventional treatments for lower back disorders.

Methods

The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) identified an educational need for a comprehensive clinical guideline to provide evidence-based recommendations. Experts from the fields of Anesthesiology, Physiatry, Neurology, Neurosurgery, Radiology, and Pain Psychology developed the ASPN Back Guideline. The world literature in English was searched using Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, BioMed Central, Web of Science, Google Scholar, PubMed, Current Contents Connect, Scopus, and meeting abstracts to identify and compile the evidence (per section) for back-related pain. Search words were selected based upon the section represented. Identified peer-reviewed literature was critiqued using United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria and consensus points are presented.

Results

After a comprehensive review and analysis of the available evidence, the ASPN Back Guideline group was able to rate the literature and provide therapy grades to each of the most commonly available interventional treatments for low back pain.

Conclusion

The ASPN Back Guideline represents the first comprehensive analysis and grading of the existing and emerging interventional treatments available for low back pain. This will be a living document which will be periodically updated to the current standard of care based on the available evidence within peer-reviewed literature.

Motion analysis in patients with postpartum sacroiliac joint dysfunction: A cross-sectional case-control study

BACKGROUND

Patients with sacroiliac joint dysfunction are limited in daily life activities such as gait, climbing stairs and rising from a chair. It is well known that individuals with chronic low back pain have impaired balance compared to healthy individuals. This cross-sectional case-control study aims to investigate spatiotemporal parameters, center of pressure and mass, pelvic angles and other joint angles in patients with sacroiliac joint dysfunction in comparison with healthy controls.

METHODS

Motion analysis existed of three tasks: (1) normal gait, (2) single-leg-stance, and (3) sit-to-stance. Spatiotemporal parameters, center of pressure, pelvic angles and other joint angles were measured using a twelve-camera, three-dimensional motion capture system and ground reaction force platforms.

FINDINGS

Thirty subjects were recruited for this study; ten patients, ten matched controls and ten healthy student controls. For gait, patients had a lower cadence, longer double support phase, shorter step length and slower walking speed than controls. For single-leg-stance, patients had a smaller hip angle of the risen leg than controls. Also, variability in center of pressure was larger in patients. For sit-to-stance, the total time to perform the task was almost doubled for patients compared to controls.

INTERPRETATION

This study demonstrates that patients with sacroiliac joint dysfunction have an impaired gait, more balance problems during standing and standing up compared to healthy controls. This novel information assists to further comprehend the pathology and disease burden of sacroiliac joint dysfunction, in addition, it may allow us to evaluate the effect of current therapies.

Hip-Spine Syndrome in the Nonarthritic Patient

Hip-spine syndrome refers to concurrent hip and spine pathology with overlapping symptoms. Most of the literature has studied it in relation to total hip arthroplasty literature and has been shown to increase dislocation risk. Lumbar spine and pelvic mobility have been studied less frequently in relation to nonarthritic pathologic hip states. Understanding the biomechanical relationship between the lumbar spine, pelvis, and hip can help elucidate how hip-spine syndrome affects the nonarthritic hip and how it impacts outcomes of hip arthroscopy. Changes in lumbar spine motion may be the reason certain predisposed patients develop symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) or ischiofemoral impingement. Some athletes may be "hip users" with a low pelvic incidence, making them more reliant on hip motion due to less-intrinsic lumbopelvic motion. When these patients have FAI morphology, their increased reliance on hip motion makes them prone to experiencing femoroacetabular contact and concurrent symptoms. Other athletes may be "spine users," with larger pelvic incidence and more baseline lumbopelvic motion, making them less reliant on hip motion and therefore less prone to experiencing hip impingement even with hip FAI morphology. Hip-spine syndrome also appears to have an impact on patient selection, role of nonoperative treatment, and hip arthroscopy surgical outcomes. Identifying patients with concurrent pathology may allow surgeons to recommend targeted physical therapy or counsel patients better on their expectations after surgery.

Minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion for chronic sacroiliac joint pain: a systematic review

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Sacroiliac (SI) joint pain causes significant disability and impairment to quality of life (QOL). Minimally invasive SI joint fusion is increasingly used to relieve chronic SI joint pain among patients who do not respond to nonsurgical treatment.

PURPOSE

To systematically review the existing literature to assess the effectiveness and safety of minimally invasive SI joint fusion.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and a clinical trial registry from database inception to June 30, 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

Eligible studies were primary research studies published in the English language, enrolled adults with SI joint pain, and compared SI joint fusion to nonsurgical interventions or alternative minimally invasive procedures. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or controlled cohort studies (CCSs) that reported effectiveness (pain, physical function, QOL, opioid use) or safety outcomes (adverse events [AEs], revision surgeries) and uncontrolled studies that reported safety outcomes.

DATA ABSTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data were abstracted into structured forms; two independent reviewers assessed risk of bias using standard instruments; certainty of evidence was rated using GRADE.

RESULTS

Forty studies (2 RCTs, 3 CCSs, and 35 uncontrolled studies) were included. Minimally invasive SI joint fusion with the iFuse Implant System appeared to result in larger improvements in pain (two RCTs: mean difference in visual analog scale -40.5 mm, 95% CI, -50.1 to -30.9; -38.1 mm, p<.0001) and larger improvements in physical function (mean difference in Oswestry Disability Index -25.4 points, 95% CI, -32.5 to -18.3; -19.8 points, p<.0001) compared to conservative management at 6 months. Improvements in pain and physical function for the RCTs appeared durable at 1- and 2-year follow-up. Findings were similar in one CCS. The two RCTs also found significant improvements in QOL at 6 months and 1 year. Opioid use may be improved at 6 months and 1 to 2 years. AEs appeared higher in the fusion group at 6 months. The incidence of revision surgery varied by study; the highest was 3.8% at 2 years. Two CCSs compared the effectiveness of alternative minimally invasive fusion procedures. One CCS compared iFuse to the Rialto SI Fusion System and reported no differences in pain, function, QOL, and revision surgeries from 6 months to 1 year. One CCS compared iFuse to percutaneous screw fixation and reported significantly fewer revisions among iFuse participants (mean difference -61.0%, 95% CI, -78.4% to -43.5%). The 35 uncontrolled studies had serious limitations and reported heterogeneous safety outcomes. Two of the larger studies reported a 13.2% incidence of complications from minimally invasive SI joint fusion at 90 days using an insurance claims database and a 3.1% incidence of revision surgery over 2.5 years using a postmarket surveillance database.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients meeting diagnostic criteria for SI joint pain and who have not responded to conservative care, minimally invasive SI joint fusion is probably more effective than conservative management for reducing pain and opioid use and improving physical function and QOL. Fusion with iFuse and Rialto appear to have similar effectiveness. AEs appear to be higher for minimally invasive SI joint fusion than conservative management through 6 months. Based on evidence from uncontrolled studies, serious AEs from minimally invasive SI joint fusion may be higher in usual practice compared to what is reported in trials. The incidence of revision surgery is likely no higher than 3.8% at 2 years. Limited evidence is available that compares different minimally invasive devices.

Sacroiliac joint pain in adolescents: Diagnostic and treatment challenges

The aim of this review was to assess diagnostic and treatment challenges of adolescents with SI joint pain. We diagnosed 13 of the patients who were referred to our chronic pain clinic because of low back pain (30%) with SI joint pain based on provocative tests response. We performed SI joint steroid infiltration. Six patients (46%) felt better immediately after the procedure and 1 (8%) patient had a one-side only pain relief after a bilateral block. Four of these patients (31%) did not experience any further episode of pain during the follow-up and three patients reported recurring pain on average 2 months after the initial procedure. The 2nd procedure was successful in two patients and the third one experienced pain again 12 months later, requiring a third successful infiltration. Six patients (46%) experienced pain again within a few hours or days after the infiltration and their pain score were unchanged compared with what they had reported prior to the procedure. We were unable to place the needle within the joint under fluoroscopy in 1 patient; however, we were successful repeating the procedure under CT guidance. One patient experienced a motor and sensory block in the distribution of the sciatic nerve immediately after the procedure, which resolved within 24 and 48 hours, respectively. SI joint pain is a distinctive pathology that can be present in children and adolescents and is often overlooked by practitioners. Its diagnosis and management are challenging in this population as it is in adults. SI joint steroids injections may play a role in the management of these patients.

Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Fusion-a Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Sacroiliac dysfunction is an important cause of low back pain with significant impact on quality of life and daily activities. Minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion (MIS SI fusion) is an effective treatment for patients who failed non-surgical strategies. The purpose of this article is to review the clinical outcomes and complications of this surgical technique.

RECENT FINDINGS

For patients with SI joint dysfunction, MIS SI fusion reduced pain and disability as measured by Visual Analog Scale and Oswestry Index and improved quality of life as measured by Short-Form 36 and EuroQol-5D questionnaires. Satisfaction rates were higher in the SI fusion group when compared to the conservative management. In recent clinical trials, adverse events occurred with a similar rate in the first 6 months for patients assigned in the conservative management versus patients assigned to MIS SI fusion. MIS SI fusion is an effective and safe procedure for patients with sacroiliac dysfunction who failed non-surgical strategies. This procedure provides rapid as well as sustained pain relief, improvement in back function, high patient satisfaction, with low rate of complications.

Multicenter study evaluating factors associated with treatment outcome for low back pain injections

BACKGROUND

There has been a worldwide surge in interventional procedures for low back pain (LBP), with studies yielding mixed results. These data support the need for identifying outcome predictors based on unique characteristics in a pragmatic setting.

METHODS

We prospectively evaluated the association between over two dozen demographic, clinical and technical factors on treatment outcomes for three procedures: epidural steroid injections (ESIs) for sciatica, and sacroiliac joint (SIJ) injections and facet interventions for axial LBP. The primary outcome was change in patient-reported average pain intensity on a numerical rating scale (average NRS-PI) using linear regression. For SIJ injections and facet radiofrequency ablation, this was average LBP score at 1 and 3 months postprocedure, respectively. For ESI, it was average leg pain 1- month postinjection. Secondary outcomes included a binary indicator of treatment response (success).

RESULTS

346 patients were enrolled at seven hospitals. All groups experienced a decrease in average NRS-PI (p<0.0001; mean 1.8±2.6). There were no differences in change in average NRS-PI among procedural groups (p=0.50). Lower baseline pain score (adjusted coefficient -0.32, 95% CI -0.48 to -0.16, p<0.0001), depressive symptomatology (adjusted coefficient 0.076, 95% CI 0.039 to 0.113, p<0.0001) and obesity (adjusted coefficient 0.62, 95% CI 0.038 to 1.21, p=0.037) were associated with smaller pain reductions. For procedural outcome, depression (adjusted OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.91, 0.97, p<0.0001) and poorer baseline function (adjusted OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.36, 0.96, p=0.034) were associated with failure. Smoking, sleep dysfunction and non-organic signs were associated with negative outcomes in univariate but not multivariate analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Identifying treatment responders is a critical endeavor for the viability of procedures in LBP. Patients with greater disease burden, depression and obesity are more likely to fail interventions. Steps to address these should be considered before or concurrent with procedures as considerations dictate.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02329951.

Reliability and validity of manual palpation for the assessment of patients with low back pain: a systematic and critical review

BACKGROUND

Static or motion manual palpation of the low back is commonly used to assess pain location and reproduction in low back pain (LBP) patients. The purpose of this study is to review the reliability and validity of manual palpation used for the assessment of LBP in adults.

METHOD

We systematically searched five databases from 2000 to 2019. We critically appraised internal validity of studies using QAREL and QUADAS-2 instruments. We stratified results using best-evidence synthesis. Validity studies were classified according to Sackett and Haynes.

RESULTS

We identified 2023 eligible articles, of which 14 were low risk of bias. Evidence suggests that reliability of soft tissue structures palpation is inconsistent, and reliability of bony structures and joint mobility palpation is poor. We found preliminary evidence that gluteal muscle palpation for tenderness may be valid in differentiating LBP patients with and without radiculopathy.

CONCLUSION

Reliability of manual palpation tests in the assessment of LBP patients varies greatly. This is problematic because these tests are commonly used by manual therapists and clinicians. Little is known about the validity of these tests; therefore, their clinical utility is uncertain. High quality validity studies are needed to inform the clinical use of manual palpation tests.

Sacroiliac joint dysfunction: pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment

PURPOSE

To review the anatomy and function of the sacroiliac joint (SIJ), as well as the pathophysiology, clinical presentation, diagnostic criteria, and treatment options for SIJ dysfunction.

METHODS

The SIJ serves an extremely crucial function in mobility, stability, and resistance against shear forces. Joint mobility becomes increasingly limited with age-related cartilaginous changes that begin in puberty and continue throughout life. Pain can also be localized to the SIJ itself, known as SIJ dysfunction. A literature review was performed on the anatomy, etiology, risk factors, diagnostic modalities, and treatment options for SIJ dysfunction.

RESULTS

SIJ dysfunction is an under-recognized source of low back pain. Dysfunction can result from various clinical conditions, as well as abnormal motion or malalignment of the joint. Diagnosis and evaluation of SIJ dysfunction are difficult, with use of physical maneuvers and image-guided anesthetic injection. Non-operative treatment options are considered first-line due to high surgical complication rates. Such options include conservative management, radiofrequency treatment, nerve blocks, and articular injections. Surgical management involves open and percutaneous approaches.

CONCLUSION

With the aging nature of the population, SIJ dysfunction has emerged as an extremely prevalent issue. Current research into the pathophysiology and risk factors of SIJ dysfunction is extremely important for planning preventative and therapeutic strategies. Various treatment options exist including conservative management, radiofrequency, nerve blocks, intra-articular or peri-articular injections, and surgical fixation. Improved diagnostic methods in clinical practice are thus critical to properly identify patients suffering from SIJ dysfunction, plan early intervention, and hasten return to function.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE I

Diagnostic: individual cross-sectional studies with the consistently applied reference standard and blinding.

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.

Clinical examination of the sacroiliac joint

Introduction:

Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) can be a nociceptive source of the pain in lower back. Clinical diagnosis of SIJ pain remains yet problematic. The cause of SIJ pain is multifactorial. The pain may be a result of an inflammatory disease, arthrosis, traumatic injury, infectious process or overload. The potential role in SIJ examination have pain provocation tests.

Objective:

To review and further discuss the validity of some of the mostly used clinical provocation tests such as Distraction test, Thigh Thrust test, Compression test, Sacral Thrust test, Patrick’s (FABER), Gaenslen’s test, Standing Flexion Test, Gillet Test and Shimpi Prone test.

Method:

A literature search was conducted using PubMed. Reviewed were studies between 2005 and 2020 in English, Slovak and Czech with keywords: sacroiliac joint, sacroiliac assessment, provocation tests. The methodology of studies was not considered.

Discussion:

It is challenging to determine whether SIJ is the actual source of the pain by using only one of the provocation tests. Therefore, it is beneficial to combine more compression tests, what will also increase the validity of testing. Other widely used SIJ tests are palpation test, however their validity is poor.

Pain and functional outcomes of the sacroiliac joint after platelet-rich plasma injection: a descriptive review

The purpose of this manuscript is to highlight and review the status of literature regarding efficacy of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in the treatment of sacroiliac joint (SIJ) dysfunction. A review of the literature on PRP interventions on the SIJ or ligaments was performed. Seven studies had improvements in their respective primary end point and demonstrated a strong safety profile without any serious adverse events. Only five articles demonstrated clinical efficacy of >50% in their primary outcome measures. There appears to be inconsistent and insufficient evidence for a conclusive recommendation for or against SIJ PRP. There is a need for adequately powered well-designed, standardized, double-blinded randomized clinical trials to determine the effectiveness of PRP in SIJ-mediated pain.

Are Hydroxyapatite-Coated Screws a Good Option for Sacroiliac Joint Stabilization? A Prospective Outcome Study

OBJECTIVE

This is a single-surgeon series to prospectively evaluate the clinical and radiologic results of sacroiliac joint (SIJ) stabilization using hydroxyapatite (HA)-coated, fully threaded screws in patients with SIJ dysfunction.

METHODS

A total number of 40 patients underwent percutaneous SIJ stabilization using HA-coated screws between 2013 and 2015 at the University Hospital of LLandough with an age range of 33-84 years. Patients were followed up closely, and outcome scores were collected preoperative and 12 months after surgery. Preoperative and postoperative outcomes were evaluated using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), Short Form-36, Oswestry Disability Index, EuroQol-5D-5L, and Majeed Pelvic Scores.

RESULTS

Thirty-three patients (8 male and 32 female) out of the 40 patients completed follow-up. There was an overall improvement in all PROMs; however, only mental component of SF-36, Oswestry Disability Index, Majeed Pelvic Scores, and EuroQol-5D-5L were statistically significant. Twenty-one patients (63%) had lysis around the screw, and a subgroup analysis showed that improvement in PROMs was significantly less in patients with lysis around the screw. Four patients with lysis around the screw were offered revision due to ongoing pain. Revision was successful in only 1 patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Percutaneous SIJ fixation procedure has been shown to have good clinical outcomes, but the use of HA-coated fully threaded screws in this procedure is not recommended on the basis of patient-reported outcome measures and radiologic findings in this prospective study.

Enhanced Spinal Therapy: Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy for the Spine

Extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) is a non-invasive therapeutic method used for pain management and muscle strength improvement through the use of shock waves. In vitro studies have demonstrated that shockwave therapy induces fluctuation in redox reaction regulation and increases in Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase (MAPK) signal transduction pathways, stimulating increased gene expression in the nucleus. ESWT has also been shown to upregulate angiogenesis and growth factors through activation of endothelial nitric oxide synthase (eNOS) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). The use of ESWT in the treatment of various musculoskeletal disorders was widely adopted throughout Europe, South America, and Asia before being introduced in the United States in 2000. Within the past 20 years, the clinical application of ESWT in the treatment of musculoskeletal and bone disorders has grown. This paper provides a comprehensive narrative review of applications and outcomes of ESWT in clinical spinal pathology and assesses reported efficacy as it relates to the pathology. A review of the literature yielded studies describing the use of ESWT in degenerative osteoporotic neuro-spinal pathology, heterotopic ossification due to spinal cord injury, cervical spondylosis, scoliosis, sacroiliitis, and coccydynia. The efficacy of ESWT as an adjunct treatment in patients with spinal cord pathologies varied with the specific pathology, however, all pathologies discussed in this review provided evidence of potential benefits with minimal adverse effects. While the use of ESWT for pain management has widely been established, further literature should aim to identify the long-term benefits of ESWT.

iFuse Implant System for Treating Chronic Sacroiliac Joint Pain: A NICE Medical Technology Guidance

Treatment and management of sacroiliac joint pain is often non-surgical, involving packages of care that can include analgesics, physiotherapy, corticosteroid injections and radiofrequency ablation. Surgical intervention is considered when patients no longer respond to conservative management. The iFuse Implant System is placed across the sacroiliac joint using minimally invasive surgery, stabilising the joint and correcting any misalignment or weakness that can cause chronic pain. The iFuse system was evaluated in 2018 by the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) as part of the Medical Technologies Evaluation Programme (MTEP). Clinical evidence for iFuse suggests improved pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI) and quality of life compared to non-surgical management. The company (SI-Bone^®) submitted two cost models indicating that iFuse was cost saving compared with open surgery and non-surgical management. Clinicians advised that non-surgical management was the most appropriate comparator and Cedar (a health technology research centre) made changes to the model to test the impact of higher acquisition and procedure costs. Cedar found iFuse to be cost incurring by approximately £560 per patient at 7 years. During the consultation period, the company reduced the cost of some iFuse consumables, and Cedar extended the time horizon to test the assumption that iFuse would become cost saving over time. These changes indicated that iFuse becomes cost saving at 8 years (approximately £129 per patient), after which the cost saving continues to increase. NICE published guidance in October 2018 recommending that the case for adoption of the iFuse system in the UK National Health Service (NHS) was supported by the evidence.