Fluoroscopically Guided Diagnostic and Therapeutic Intra-Articular Sacroiliac Joint Injections: A Systematic Review

Pain and Functional Outcomes After Sacroiliac Joint Injection with Anesthetic and Corticosteroid at Six Months, Stratified by Anesthetic Response and Physical Exam Maneuvers

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate sacroiliac joint (SIJ) injection outcomes with local anesthetic and corticosteroid.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort.

SETTING

Single academic medical center.

METHODS

Thirty-four patients referred for SIJ injection with a clinical diagnosis of SIJ pain underwent injections with 1:1 mixture of 2% lidocaine and triamcinolone 40 mg/mL. Pain provocation physical exam (PE) maneuvers were recorded immediately before and after injection. Outcome measures at two to four weeks and six months included pain numeric rating scale (NRS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI).

RESULTS

For the analysis of outcomes by the overall group (not stratified by PE and/or anesthetic block), a 58.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] = +/-16.5%) ≥2 NRS reduction, a 32.4% (95% CI = +/-15.7%) ≥50% NRS reduction, and a 38.2% (95% CI = +/-16.3%) ≥30% ODI reduction were observed at two to four weeks, with similar improvements at six months. Outcomes stratified based on pre-injection PE did not reveal significant differences at either time point. The stratification based on the presence of 100% postinjection anesthetic response demonstrated a significant difference at two to four weeks for ≥50% NRS improvement. The true positive/true negative group (TP/TN) stratification demonstrated a significant difference for ≥50% NRS improvement at two to four weeks, whereas six-month outcomes for TP/TN demonstrated significant differences for ≥50% NRS and ≥30% ODI improvement. An increased injection response was observed with stratification of patients more likely to have true SIJ pain (i.e., TP), with TP/TN stratification demonstrating a 75% (95% CI = +/-30.0%) ≥2 NRS improvement and a 62.5% (95% CI = +/-33.5%) improvement of ≥50% NRS and ≥30% ODI for the TP group at two to four weeks, with similar results at six months.

CONCLUSIONS

SIJ steroid injection based on referral clinical diagnosis is unlikely to demonstrate true injection efficacy, and more specific selection criteria are warranted.

Current Evidence for Diagnosis of Common Conditions Causing Low Back Pain: Systematic Review and Standardized Terminology Recommendations

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate and summarize current evidence for diagnosis of common conditions causing low back pain and to propose standardized terminology use.

METHODS

A systematic review of the scientific literature was conducted from inception through December 2018. Electronic databases searched included PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane, and Index to Chiropractic Literature. Methodological quality was assessed with the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network checklists.

RESULTS

Of the 3995 articles screened, 36 (8 systematic reviews and 28 individual studies) met final eligibility criteria. Diagnostic criteria for identifying likely discogenic, sacroiliac joint, and zygapophyseal (facet) joint pain are supported by clinical studies using injection-confirmed tissue provocation or anesthetic procedures. Diagnostic criteria for myofascial pain, sensitization (central and peripheral), and radicular pain are supported by expert consensus-level evidence. Criteria for radiculopathy and neurogenic claudication are supported by studies using combined expert-level consensus and imaging findings.

CONCLUSION

The absence of high-quality, objective, gold-standard diagnostic methods limits the accuracy of current evidence-based criteria and results in few high-quality studies with a low risk of bias in patient selection and reference standard diagnosis. These limitations suggest practitioners should use evidence-based criteria to inform working diagnoses rather than definitive diagnoses for low back pain. To avoid the unnecessary complexity and confusion created by multiple overlapping and nonspecific terms, adopting International Association for the Study of Pain terminology and definitions is recommended.

Diagnosis and interventional pain management options for sacroiliac joint pain

The sacroiliac (SI) joint is among the most common sources of chronic low back pain, accounting for 15%-30% of patients presenting chronic low back pain. The complex anatomic structures, nerve innervation, and functional biomechanisms of the SI region make it challenging to diagnose and treat the SI joint as a pain source. In addition to physical therapy and medication for treating SI joint pain, multiple interventional measures including steroid injection, radiofrequency ablation, prolotherapy, and SI joint fusion have been proposed with various efficacies. This article describes the etiology, risk factors, and diagnostic methods as well as the different treatment modalities, focusing on interventional pain management options for patients suffering from SI joint pain.

Technical variation of trans-articular sacroiliac joint (SIJ) fusion using three screws considering the effects of sacral dysplasia in patients with non-traumatic SIJ pain

Background

This study evaluated the technical adequacy of trans-articular sacroiliac joint (SIJ) fusion using three screws for non-traumatic SIJ pain, considering different grades of sacral dysplasia.

Methods

Cadaveric CT data of unilateral sacropelvic complexes for 72 individuals (53.4 ± 8.4 years) were selected. A 3D model was reformatted into the plain lateral radiograph to mark the articular surface of the SIJ. Subjects were classified into dysplastic (DYS) and non-dysplastic sacrum (NDS) groups. Proximal (PS), middle (MS), and distal screws (DS) with 10-mm diameter were virtually introduced to the iliac bone and the SIJ on the lateral image with a 5-mm safety margin. On a corresponding axial image, each screw was advanced vertically to the sagittal plane with the same safety margin. The entry points for each screw to the endplate of S1 (S2) and to the corresponding anterior sacral margin on the lateral image were measured, along with the maximal screw lengths on the axial image. Whether each screw passed through the SIJ was determined. Different types of sacral dysplasia and screws were compared statistically.

Results

Thirty-eight (26.4%) cases were DYS, and 106 (73.6%) were NDS. The entry points of all screws were significantly more distal in DYS than in NDS groups. The PS and MS screw lengths differed significantly between the 2 groups. Incidences of short sacral fixation (< 10 mm) were significantly higher for the DS in both NDS (38.7%) and DYS (39.5%) groups. Incidences of screw pass were lowest for the MS in both NDS (43.4%) and DYS (47.4%) groups.

Conclusions

Sacral dysplasia locates the SIJ more distally and therefore affects the entry point locations and screw lengths for all screws in trans-articular SIJ fusion, compared with a non-dysplastic sacrum. Moreover, three-screw fixation risks the development of unstable DS fixation and a high extra-articular fixation rate in MS.

Building a Collaborative Model of Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction and Pelvic Girdle Pain to Understand the Diverse Perspectives of Experts

BACKGROUND

Pelvic girdle pain (PGP) and sacroiliac joint (SIJ) dysfunction/pain are considered frequent contributors to low back pain (LBP). Like other persistent pain conditions, PGP is increasingly recognized as a multifactorial problem involving biological, psychological, and social factors. Perspectives differ between experts and a diversity of treatments (with variable degrees of evidence) have been utilized.

OBJECTIVE

To develop a collaborative model of PGP that represents the collective view of a group of experts. Specific goals were to analyze structure and composition of conceptual models contributed by participants, to aggregate them into a metamodel, to analyze the metamodel's composition, and to consider predicted efficacy of treatments.

DESIGN

To develop a collaborative model of PGP, models were generated by invited individuals to represent their understanding of PGP using fuzzy cognitive mapping (FCM). FCMs involved proposal of components related to causes, outcomes, and treatments for pain, disability, and quality of life, and their connections. Components were classified into thematic categories. Weighting of connections was summed for components to judge their relative importance. FCMs were aggregated into a metamodel for analysis of the collective opinion it represented and to evaluate expected efficacy of treatments.

RESULTS

From 21 potential contributors, 14 (67%) agreed to participate (representing six disciplines and seven countries). Participants' models included a mean (SD) of 22 (5) components each. FCMs were refined to combine similar terms, leaving 89 components in 10 categories. Biomechanical factors were the most important in individual FCMs. The collective opinion from the metamodel predicted greatest efficacy for injection, exercise therapy, and surgery for pain relief.

CONCLUSIONS

The collaborative model of PGP showed a bias toward biomechanical factors. Most efficacious treatments predicted by the model have modest to no evidence from clinical trials, suggesting a mismatch between opinion and evidence. The model enables integration and communication of the collection of opinions on PGP.

Challenges in Diagnosing Sacroiliac Joint Pain: A Narrative Review

Accurate diagnosis of sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain is challenging. Diagnosis can be aided by pain referral patterns, historical features, physical examination maneuvers, and imaging. However, all of these diagnostic tools have limitations. The most reliable clinical tools may be a combination of three or more positive physical exam maneuvers, although the evidence is inconsistent even for this strategy. Intra-articular diagnostic SIJ injections are often used as the reference standard for "true" sacroiliac pain. However, such injections do not consider extra-articular sources of pain that may also exist as part of the sacroiliac joint complex. Research has established the posterior sacral ligaments as a possible source of pain, and the innervation of these ligaments has been anatomically defined. It is possible that by expanding our focus from the articular portion of the sacroiliac complex structure to both the joint and extra-capsular ligaments, advancements in clinical diagnosis and treatment will be possible.

Chronic nonspecific (musculoskeletal) low back pain. Guidelines of the Russian Society for the Study of Pain (RSSP)

Examination of a patient with chronic low back pain (LBP) is aimed at eliminating its specific cause and assessing the social and psychological factors of chronic pain. The diagnosis of chronic nonspecific (musculoskeletal) LBP is based on the exclusion of a specific cause of pain, discogenic radiculopathy, and lumbar stenosis. It is advisable to identify possible pain sources: pathology of intervertebral disc pathology, facet joints, and sacroiliac joint and myofascial syndrome.

An integrated multidisciplinary approach (a high level of evidence), including therapeutic exercises, physical activity optimization, psychological treatments (cognitive behavioral therapy), an educational program (back pain school for patients), and manual therapy, is effective in treating chronic musculoskeletal LBP. For pain relief, one may use nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in minimally effective doses and in a short cycle, muscle relaxants, and a capsaicin patch, and, if there is depressive disorder, antidepressants (a medium level of evidence). Radiofrequency denervation or therapeutic blockages with anesthetics and glucocorticoids (damage to the facet joints, sacroiliac joint), back massage, and acupuncture (a low level of evidence) may be used in some patients.

Therapeutic exercises and an educational program (the prevention of excessive loads and prolonged static and uncomfortable postures and the use of correct methods for lifting weights, etc.) are recommended for preventive purposes. 

Local sacroiliac injections in the treatment of spondyloarthritis. What is the evidence?

Local sacroiliac injections represent an available treatment option in spondyloarthritis (SpA). There is no synthetic data about efficacy of this procedure in SpA. The aim of this review is to analyze the available data of the literature of local sacroiliac injections in SpA.

METHODS

A Pubmed search of papers published after 1990 was performed.

RESULTS

Pubmed search retained 15 publications in spondyloarthritis, 12 with corticosteroids (total of 468 injections in 268 patients), including 2 small-sized controlled studies, and 3 with TNF blockers (24 patients in open studies). With steroids, the two controlled studies (with a total number of 30 patients only) demonstrated significant results over placebo. In open studies, good response was reported in more than 80% of the cases, with a mean duration of improvement over 8 months. Reduction of sacroiliac inflammation on MRI was also found in several studies after injection. There is no consensus about the technique of injection or the type of steroid injected. No particular safety concern was reported. Many limitations have to be considered in the interpretation of these results.

CONCLUSION

This kind of procedure should be kept in the therapeutic armament in the current setting of costly targeted systemic treatments of spondyloarthritis. However, definition of a clear position in the treatment strategy needs further well-conducted studies.

Use of Manual Therapy for Posterior Pelvic Girdle Pain

Use of manual therapies in the treatment of posterior pelvic pain is a common practice. The rationale for use of manual therapies is often associated with the structural movement of the sacroiliac joint. Increasing evidence has shown this not to be the case, as manual therapy's effect is more neurophysiological in nature. This article seeks to clarify the difference between the two explanations as well as to expand upon outside influences such as expectations, therapeutic alliance, and equipoise that may influence the outcome of treatment. Treatment effects may be maximized with manual therapy if clinicians have an understanding of the role of each of these variables in their treatment approach.

Success Rate of Intra-articular Sacroiliac Joint Injection: Fluoroscopy vs Ultrasound Guidance—A Cadaveric Study

Background

Given the unacceptably high miss rates of non-image-guided injections into the sacroiliac joint, either fluoroscopy or ultrasound is recommended for guidance. The real success rate of both techniques was assessed by cadaver dissection.

Methods

Twenty bodies donated to science (40 joints: 15 female and 5 male) were investigated bilaterally. Fluoroscopy and a lower ultrasound-guided approach were performed in 10 bodies each. Conditions during puncture, the subjective feeling of the needle being intra-articular, and, for fluoroscopic guidance, the intra-articular spread of the contrast were assessed. First, 0.5 cc of Iopamidol was injected, followed by 2 mL of red-colored latex. The spread was investigated by dissection via anterior opening of the sacroiliac joint and the dorsal ligaments.

Results

Ultrasound guidance was used in 1/20 (5%, 95% CI = 0.9–23.6%) intra-articular injections. In 19/20 (95%, 95% CI = 0.9–23.6%) cases, latex spread in the interosseous sacroiliac ligament was used. Conditions of structural visibility were classified as good in 11/20 (55%, 95% CI = 34.2–74.2%) cases, puncture condition as good in 16/20 (80%, 95% CI = 58.4–91.9%) cases, and subjective feeling of the needle being intra-articular was present in 10/20 (50%, 95% CI = 34.2–74.2%) cases. Fluoroscopy showed an intra-articular injection in 10/20 (50%, 95% CI = 34.2–74.2%) cases. The structure visibility in fluoroscopy was good in 9/20 (45%, 95% CI = 25.8–65.8%), puncture conditions good in 8/20 (40%, 95% CI = 21.9–61.3%), intra-articular contrast spread visible in 10/20 (50%, 95% CI = 34.2–74.2%), and subjective feeling of being intra-articular was present in 17/20 (85%, 95% CI = 64.0–94.8%) cases.

Conclusions

Fluoroscopy clearly showed a higher success rate of intra-articular sacroiliac joint injection.

Fluoroscopically Guided vs Landmark-Guided Sacroiliac Joint Injections: A Randomized Controlled Study

OBJECTIVES

To determine the prevalence of intra- and extra-articular sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain, which injection is more beneficial, and whether fluoroscopy improves outcomes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This patient- and evaluator-blinded comparative effectiveness study randomized 125 participants with SIJ pain from April 30, 2014, through December 12, 2017, to receive fluoroscopically guided injections into the joint capsule (group 1) or "blind" injections to the point of maximum tenderness using sham radiographs (group 2). The primary outcome was average pain on a 0 to 10 scale 1 month after injection. A positive outcome was defined as at least a 2-point decrease in average pain score coupled with positive (>3) satisfaction on a Likert scale from 1 to 5.

RESULTS

For the primary outcome, no significant differences were observed between groups (mean ± SD change from baseline, -2.3±2.4 points in group 1 vs -1.7±2.3 points in group 2; 95% CI, -0.33 to 1.36 points for adjusted difference; P=.23), nor was there a difference in the proportions of positive blocks (61% vs 62%) or 1-month categorical outcome (48% vs 40% in groups 1 and 2, respectively; P=.33). At 3 months, the mean ± SD reductions in average pain (-1.8±2.1 vs -0.9 ± 2.0 points; 95% CI, 0.11 to 1.58 points for adjusted difference; P=.02) and worst pain (-2.2±2.5 vs -1.4±2.0 points; 95% CI, 0.01 to 1.66 points for adjusted difference; P=.049) were greater in group 1 than 2, with other outcome differences falling shy of statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

Although fluoroscopically guided injections provide greater intermediate-term benefit in some patients, these differences are modest and accompanied by large cost differences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02096653.

Unique aspects of clinical trials of invasive therapies for chronic pain

Nearly all who review the literature conclude that the role of invasive procedures to treat chronic pain is poorly characterized because of the lack of “definitive” studies. The overt nature of invasive treatments, along with the risks, technical skills, and costs involved create challenges to study them. However, these challenges do not completely preclude evaluating invasive procedure effectiveness and safety using well-designed methods. This article reviews the challenges of studying outcomes of invasive therapies to treat pain and discuss possible solutions. Although the following discussion can apply to most invasive therapies to treat chronic pain, it is beyond the scope of the article to individually cover every invasive therapy used. Therefore, most of the examples focus on injection therapies to treat spine pain, spinal cord stimulation, and intrathecal drug therapies.

Injectable Corticosteroids in Sport

OBJECTIVE

To review the literature guiding all aspects of the use of injectable corticosteroids for painful musculoskeletal conditions, with a focus on the treatment of athletes.

DATA SOURCES

An extensive search of the literature was completed including search terms of corticosteroid, steroid, athlete, and injection, among others. Additional articles were used after being identified from previously reviewed articles.

MAIN RESULTS

Injections of corticosteroids for a variety of painful conditions of the extremities and the axial spine have been described. Numerous minor and major complications have been reported, including those with a high degree of morbidity. There is a dearth of published research on the use of corticosteroid injections in athletes, with most of the research on this topic focused on older, nonathlete populations. Generally, these injections are well tolerated and can provide short-term pain improvement with little or no long-term benefits.

CONCLUSIONS

Corticosteroid injections should be used cautiously in athletes and only after a full consideration of the pharmacology, pathogenesis of disease, potential benefits, complications, factors specific to the athlete, and rules of athletic governing bodies. Corticosteroid injections are just one component of a comprehensive rehabilitation plan available to the physician providing care to athletes.

Evidence-Based Nonpharmacologic Strategies for Comprehensive Pain Care: The Consortium Pain Task Force White Paper

Medical pain management is in crisis; from the pervasiveness of pain to inadequate pain treatment, from the escalation of prescription opioids to an epidemic in addiction, diversion and overdose deaths. The rising costs of pain care and managing adverse effects of that care have prompted action from state and federal agencies including the DOD, VHA, NIH, FDA and CDC. There is pressure for pain medicine to shift away from reliance on opioids, ineffective procedures and surgeries toward comprehensive pain management that includes evidence-based nonpharmacologic options. This White Paper details the historical context and magnitude of the current pain problem including individual, social and economic impacts as well as the challenges of pain management for patients and a healthcare workforce engaging prevalent strategies not entirely based in current evidence. Detailed here is the evidence-base for nonpharmacologic therapies effective in postsurgical pain with opioid sparing, acute non-surgical pain, cancer pain and chronic pain. Therapies reviewed include acupuncture therapy, massage therapy, osteopathic and chiropractic manipulation, meditative movement therapies Tai chi and yoga, mind body behavioral interventions, dietary components and self-care/self-efficacy strategies. Transforming the system of pain care to a responsive comprehensive model necessitates that options for treatment and collaborative care must be evidence-based and include effective nonpharmacologic strategies that have the advantage of reduced risks of adverse events and addiction liability. The evidence demands a call to action to increase awareness of effective nonpharmacologic treatments for pain, to train healthcare practitioners and administrators in the evidence base of effective nonpharmacologic practice, to advocate for policy initiatives that remedy system and reimbursement barriers to evidence-informed comprehensive pain care, and to promote ongoing research and dissemination of the role of effective nonpharmacologic treatments in pain, focused on the short- and long-term therapeutic and economic impact of comprehensive care practices.

Deconstructing Chronic Low Back Pain in the Older Adult-Step by Step Evidence and Expert-Based Recommendations for Evaluation and Treatment: Part X: Sacroiliac Joint Syndrome

OBJECTIVE

To present an algorithm of sequential treatment options for managing sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain in the setting of chronic low back pain (CLBP) in the older adult. This is the tenth part in a series, and includes an illustrative clinical case.

METHODS

The stepped care drug table and evaluation and treatment algorithm were created following a thorough literature review of approaches and subsequent analysis through a modified Delphi process. The principal investigator developed the initial draft, which was refined for content by an interdisciplinary panel of five experts. The refined materials were then assessed for the feasibility of implementation and validity of recommendations for older adults in a primary care setting by a panel of nine primary care providers. While not exclusive to Veteran's Health Administration (VHA) facilities, an emphasis was made to include resources and medications available to providers in the VHA.

RESULTS

The algorithm and drug table developed to systematically identify and address SIJ pain in the older adult is presented here. The process should begin with recognizing the presenting symptoms of CLBP stemming from the SI region, and supporting physical exam testing using the compression test and thigh thrust maneuver. Identification of the SIJ as a pain generator is followed by assessment and treatment of contributory factors. SIJ pain treatment should begin with education and self-management including exercise, and may escalate to include interventional procedures and/or referral to a pain rehabilitation program.

CONCLUSIONS

Pain originating from the SIJ is often under-recognized, but a structured and consistent approach can help identify older patients who would benefit from treatment of this contributor to CLBP.

KEY WORDS

Chronic Low Back Pain; Sacroiliac Joint Pain; Older Adults.

Fluoroscopy-Guided Sacroiliac Intraarticular Injection via the Middle Portion of the Joint

Objective

Sacroiliac intraarticular injection is necessary to confirm sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain and is usually performed via the caudal one-third portion of the joint. However, this is occasionally impossible for anatomical reasons, and the success rate is low in clinical settings. We describe a technique via the middle portion of the joint.

Design

Observational study.

Subjects

Enrolled were 69 consecutive patients (27 men and 42 women, with an average age of 53 years) in whom the middle portion of 100 joints was targeted.

Method

With the patient lying prone-oblique with the painful side down, a spinal needle was inserted into the middle portion of the joint. Subsequently, the fluoroscopy tube was angled at a caudal tilt of 25-30° to clearly detect the recess between the ilium and sacrum and the needle depth and direction. When the needle reached the posterior joint line, 2% lidocaine was injected after the contrast medium outlined the joint.

Results

The success rate of the injection method was 80% (80/100). Among 80 successful cases, four were previously unsuccessful when the conventional method was used. Intraarticular injection using the new technique was unsuccessful in 20 joints; in three of these cases, the conventional method proved successful, and no techniques were successful in the other 17 cases.

Conclusion

The injection technique via the middle portion of the joint can overcome some of the difficulties of the conventional injection method and can improve the chances of successful intraarticular injection.

An Expedited Diagnostic Algorithm for Lumbosacral Pain: "The Best Likelihood Scenario Approach"

INTRODUCTION

The logic behind diagnostic blocks is very straightforward. What has not been determined is the way diagnostic blocks can be best used.

STUDY DESIGN

Philosophical essay.

DISCUSSION

The interventional pain management physician would serve as the diagnostic expert by efficiently determining the source of the patient's pain.

CONCLUSION

"The Best Likelihood Scenario" might improve diagnostic accuracy while decreasing societal costs.