Controlled medial branch anesthetic block in the diagnosis of chronic lumbar facet joint pain: the value of a three-month follow-up

Predictors of Outcomes After Lumbar Intra-Articular Facet Joint Injections and Medial Branch Blocks: A Scoping Review

STUDY DESIGN

A scoping review.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to identify and describe the factors associated with the patient-reported response after lumbar intra-articular facet joint (FJ) injections or medial branch blocks (MBBs).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

FJ osteoarthritis is among the most common causes of chronic low back pain. Management often includes FJ intra-articular injection and MBBs (which may be followed by radiofrequency ablation of the nerves innervating these joints). However, the success of these approaches is variable, prompting interest in identifying patient characteristics (imaging features, clinical signs, and among others) associated with response to these types of facet injections.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a literature search on factors associated with patient-reported outcomes after lumbar FJ intra-articular injections or MBBs for patients with low back pain published in English or Spanish between 2000 and 2023. We excluded duplicate papers that did not describe factors associated with outcomes or those describing other interventions. We collected data on the association of these factors with patient-reported outcomes.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. These studies evaluated factors, such as age, depression, and single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), and among variables. Age and imaging findings of facet arthropathy were the most frequently described factors. Imaging findings of FJ arthropathy and positive SPECT were often associated with positive results after intra-articular FJ injections or MBBs. In contrast, younger age and smoking were frequently associated with less favorable clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Numerous factors were considered in the 37 studies included in this review. Imaging findings of facet arthropathy, duration of pain, and positive SPECT were consistently associated with favorable results after facet interventions.

Ultrasound-guided lumbar medial branch blocks and intra-articular facet joint injections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Supplemental Digital Content is Available in the Text.

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, ultrasound-guided lumbar medial branch blocks and facet joint injections were associated with significant risk of incorrect needle placement.

There is great interest in expanding the use of ultrasound (US), but new challenges exist with its application to lumbar facet–targeted procedures. The primary aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the risk of incorrect needle placement associated with US–guided lumbar medial branch blocks (MBB) and facet joint injections (FJI) as confirmed by fluoroscopy or computerized tomography (CT). An a priori protocol was registered, and a database search was conducted. Inclusion criteria included all study types. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized controlled trials and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood tool for assessing risk bias for observational cohort studies. Pooled analysis of the risk difference (RD) of incorrect needle placement was calculated. Pooled analysis of 7 studies demonstrated an 11% RD (P < 0.0009) of incorrect needle placement for US-guided MBB confirmed using fluoroscopy with and without contrast. Pooled analysis of 3 studies demonstrated a 13% RD (P < 0.0001) of incorrect needle placement for US-guided FJI confirmed using CT. The time to complete a single-level MBB ranged from 2.6 to 5.0 minutes. The certainty of evidence was low to very low. Ultrasound-guided lumbar MBB and FJI are associated with a significant risk of incorrect needle placement when confirmed by fluoroscopy or CT. The technical limitations of US and individual patient factors could contribute to the risk of incorrect needle placement.

Spinal Injections

Spinal pain is a common complaint and cause of disability in the United States, affecting most individuals at some point in their lives. The complex anatomy of the spine leads to multiple potential and coexisting etiologies for pain, and the differentiation of these sources can present a diagnostic challenge. Image-guided spinal injections can provide both diagnostic information identifying pain location as well as prolonged therapeutic relief as an alternative to medical management. Anesthetic and corticosteroid medications can be administered within the epidural space through transforaminal or interlaminar approaches, blocking various sensory nerves, or directly within the facet joints. Proceduralists must be aware of associated patient considerations, techniques, and potential complications to perform the procedures safely. We discuss image-guided spinal injection techniques, based on best practices and our experiences.

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.

Guideline summary review: an evidence-based clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of low back pain

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The North American Spine Society's (NASS) Evidence Based Clinical Guideline for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Low Back Pain features evidence-based recommendations for diagnosing and treating adult patients with nonspecific low back pain. The guideline is intended to reflect contemporary treatment concepts for nonspecific low back pain as reflected in the highest quality clinical literature available on this subject as of February 2016.

PURPOSE

The purpose of the guideline is to provide an evidence-based educational tool to assist spine specialists when making clinical decisions for adult patients with nonspecific low back pain. This article provides a brief summary of the evidence-based guideline recommendations for diagnosing and treating patients with this condition.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a guideline summary review.

METHODS

This guideline is the product of the Low Back Pain Work Group of NASS' Evidence-Based Clinical Guideline Development Committee. The methods used to develop this guideline are detailed in the complete guideline and technical report available on the NASS website. In brief, a multidisciplinary work group of spine care specialists convened to identify clinical questions to address in the guideline. The literature search strategy was developed in consultation with medical librarians. Upon completion of the systematic literature search, evidence relevant to the clinical questions posed in the guideline was reviewed. Work group members utilized NASS evidentiary table templates to summarize study conclusions, identify study strengths and weaknesses, and assign levels of evidence. Work group members participated in webcasts and in-person recommendation meetings to update and formulate evidence-based recommendations and incorporate expert opinion when necessary. The draft guideline was submitted to an internal and external peer review process and ultimately approved by the NASS Board of Directors.

RESULTS

Eighty-two clinical questions were addressed, and the answers are summarized in this article. The respective recommendations were graded according to the levels of evidence of the supporting literature.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence-based clinical guideline has been created using techniques of evidence-based medicine and best available evidence to aid practitioners in the diagnosis and treatment of adult patients with nonspecific low back pain. The entire guideline document, including the evidentiary tables, literature search parameters, literature attrition flowchart, suggestions for future research, and all of the references, is available electronically on the NASS website at https://www.spine.org/ResearchClinicalCare/QualityImprovement/ClinicalGuidelines.aspx.

Consensus practice guidelines on interventions for lumbar facet joint pain from a multispecialty, international working group

BACKGROUND

The past two decades have witnessed a surge in the use of lumbar facet blocks and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) to treat low back pain (LBP), yet nearly all aspects of the procedures remain controversial.

METHODS

After approval by the Board of Directors of the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, letters were sent to a dozen pain societies, as well as representatives from the US Departments of Veterans Affairs and Defense. A steering committee was convened to select preliminary questions, which were revised by the full committee. Questions were assigned to 4-5 person modules, who worked with the Subcommittee Lead and Committee Chair on preliminary versions, which were sent to the full committee. We used a modified Delphi method, whereby the questions were sent to the committee en bloc and comments were returned in a non-blinded fashion to the Chair, who incorporated the comments and sent out revised versions until consensus was reached.

RESULTS

17 questions were selected for guideline development, with 100% consensus achieved by committee members on all topics. All societies except for one approved every recommendation, with one society dissenting on two questions (number of blocks and cut-off for a positive block before RFA), but approving the document. Specific questions that were addressed included the value of history and physical examination in selecting patients for blocks, the value of imaging in patient selection, whether conservative treatment should be used before injections, whether imaging is necessary for block performance, the diagnostic and prognostic value of medial branch blocks (MBB) and intra-articular (IA) injections, the effects of sedation and injectate volume on validity, whether facet blocks have therapeutic value, what the ideal cut-off value is for a prognostic block, how many blocks should be performed before RFA, how electrodes should be oriented, the evidence for larger lesions, whether stimulation should be used before RFA, ways to mitigate complications, if different standards should be applied to clinical practice and clinical trials and the evidence for repeating RFA (see table 12 for summary).

CONCLUSIONS

Lumbar medial branch RFA may provide benefit to well-selected individuals, with MBB being more predictive than IA injections. More stringent selection criteria are likely to improve denervation outcomes, but at the expense of more false-negatives. Clinical trials should be tailored based on objectives, and selection criteria for some may be more stringent than what is ideal in clinical practice.

Ultrasound practice for chronic pain procedures: A comprehensive review

Chronic pain management techniques have evolved in recent years. With regard to this, ultrasound (US) technology has become a standard for most acute pain procedures and essential for postsurgical pain relief and enhanced recovery after surgery protocols. This manuscript summarizes clinical studies evaluating US use for chronic pain management and compares efficacy with standard techniques including fluoroscopy (FL). US possesses several unique benefits when compared with FL, including elimination of radiation exposure while providing similar clinical outcomes. In summary, US use for chronic pain procedures is emerging as a viable, safe, and effective modality. Additional studies are needed to best appreciate US and its role in chronic pain management.

Relationship between paravertebral muscle twitching and long-term effects of radiofrequency medial branch neurotomy

Background

To achieve a prolonged therapeutic effect in patients with lumbar facet joint syndrome, radiofrequency medial branch neurotomy (RF-MB) is commonly performed. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of paravertebral muscle twitching when performing RF-MB in patients with lumbar facet joint syndrome.

Methods

We collected and analyzed data from 68 patients with confirmed facet joint syndrome. Sensory stimulation was performed at 50 Hz with a 0.5 V cut-off value. Patients were divided into 3 groups according to the twitching of the paravertebral muscle during 2 Hz motor stimulation: ‘Complete’, when twitching was observed at all needles; ‘Partial’, when twitching was present at 1 or 2 needles; and ‘None’, when no twitching was observed. The relationship between the long-term effects of RF-MB and paravertebral muscle twitching was analyzed.

Results

The mean effect duration of RF-MB was 4.6, 5.8, and 7.0 months in the None, Partial, and Complete groups, respectively (P = 0.47). Although the mean effect duration of RF-MB did not increase significantly in proportion to the paravertebral muscle twitching, the Complete group had prolonged effect duration (> 6 months) than the None group in subgroup analysis. (P = 0.03).

Conclusions

Paravertebral muscle twitching while performing lumbar RF-MB may be a reliable predictor of long-term efficacy when sensory provocation under 0.5 V is achieved. However, further investigation may be necessary for clarifying its clinical significance.

Interventional pain management for spinal disorders: a review of injection techniques

Chronic spinal pain has a high prevalence and a severe economic, societal and health impact. In the last decades the practice and research of interventional techniques for the diagnosis and treatment of spinal pain has increased sharply. The level of evidence of the most common techniques is well documented. With image-guided precise diagnostic blocks it is possible to identify the source of chronic spinal pain in well over 60% of the cases. Nonsurgical specialties such as PM&R increasingly resort to the possibilities of interventional pain management for musculoskeletal disorders. For many forms of spinal pain there is at least fair evidence for long-term pain relief after a guided therapeutic injection often reducing the intake of analgesic medication or the need for surgery. This review focuses on the evidence, the application spectrum and special considerations of injection techniques for the treatment of spinal disorders.