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

5. Sacroiliac joint pain

INTRODUCTION

Sacroiliac (SI) joint pain is defined as pain localized in the anatomical region of the SI joint. The reported prevalence of SI joint pain among patients with mechanical low back pain varies between 15% and 30%.

METHODS

In this narrative review, the literature on the diagnosis and treatment of SI joint pain was updated and summarized.

RESULTS

Patient's history provides clues on the source of pain. The specificity and sensitivity of provocative maneuvers are relatively high when three or more tests are positive, though recent studies have questioned the predictive value of single or even batteries of provocative tests. Medical imaging is indicated only to rule out red flags for potentially serious conditions. The diagnostic value of SI joint infiltration with local anesthetic remains controversial due to the potential for false-positive and false-negative results. Treatment of SI joint pain ideally consists of a multidisciplinary approach that includes conservative measures as first-line therapies (eg, pharmacological treatment, cognitive-behavioral therapy, manual medicine, exercise therapy and rehabilitation treatment, and if necessary, psychological support). Intra- and extra-articular corticosteroid injections have been documented to produce pain relief for over 3 months in some people. Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of the L5 dorsal ramus and S1-3 (or 4) lateral branches has been shown to be efficacious in numerous studies, with extensive lesioning strategies (eg, cooled RFA) demonstrating the strongest evidence. The reported rate of complications for SI joint treatments is low.

CONCLUSIONS

SI joint pain should ideally be managed in a multidisciplinary and multimodal manner. When conservative treatment fails, corticosteroid injections and radiofrequency treatment can be considered.

Interventional treatments for low back pain due to sacroiliac joint dysfunction: a systematic review of the literature

PURPOSE

This systematic review aimed to report the current evidence in the literature about the efficacy of interventional treatments in the management of low back pain (LBP) due to sacroiliac joint dysfunction.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Medline, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and CENTRAL bibliographic databases were searched. The search was performed from October to December 2021, and articles from the inception of the database to December 2021 were searched.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies were included for qualitative synthesis. Five studies used the traditional radiofrequency approach (tRF), five studies used cooled radiofrequency approach (cRF), one study used botulinum toxin (BT), two studies used steroid injection, triamcinolone (TA) and local anesthetics injections, and one study used pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) denervation. Two studies used sham as a comparator.

CONCLUSIONS

Cooled radiofrequency seems to be the most effective treatment in improving pain and functionality, while intra-articular injections are helpful only as diagnostic tools. However, due to the lack of high-quality studies, it was not possible to draw significant conclusions.

Cooled radiofrequency ablation versus standard medical management for chronic sacroiliac joint pain: a multicenter, randomized comparative effectiveness study

INTRODUCTION

Low back pain is the leading cause of disability worldwide, with sacroiliac joint pain comprising up to 30% of cases of axial lower back pain. Conservative therapies provide only modest relief. Although placebo-controlled trials show efficacy for sacral lateral branch cooled radiofrequency ablation, there are no comparative effectiveness studies.

METHODS

In this randomized, multicenter comparative effectiveness study, 210 patients with clinically suspected sacroiliac joint pain who obtained short-term benefit from diagnostic sacroiliac joint injections and prognostic lateral branch blocks were randomly assigned to receive cooled radiofrequency ablation of the L5 dorsal ramus and S1-S3 lateral branches or standard medical management consisting of pharmacotherapy, injections and integrative therapies. The primary outcome measure was mean reduction in low back pain score on a 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale at 3 months. Secondary outcomes included measures of quality of life and function.

RESULTS

3 months post-treatment, the mean Numeric Rating Scale pain score for the cooled radiofrequency ablation group was 3.8±2.4 (mean reduction 2.5±2.5) compared with 5.9±1.7 (mean reduction 0.4±1.7) in the standard medical management group (p<0.0001). 52.3% of subjects in the cooled radiofrequency ablation group experienced >2 points or 30% pain relief and were deemed responders versus 4.3% of standard medical management patients (p<0.0001). Comparable improvements favoring cooled radiofrequency ablation were noted in Oswestry Disability Index score (mean 29.7±15.2 vs 41.5+13.6; p<0.0001) and quality of life (mean EuroQoL-5 score 0.68±0.22 vs 0.47±0.29; p<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with sacroiliac joint pain, cooled radiofrequency ablation provided statistically superior improvements across the spectrum of patient outcomes compared with standard medical management.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03601949.

Osseointegration of minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fixation implants-A human retrieval study

Minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion has become increasingly prevalent and is described to reduce pain and improve function. In some patients, pain can recur several months after primary surgery. Lack of early implant osseointegration might be a cause of pain and hence an indication for revision surgery. Triangular titanium implants are the most documented implant for minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion. There is, however, no knowledge of how triangular titanium implants osseointegrate in humans and whether fusion is induced over the sacroiliac joint. During planned revision surgery due to recurrent pain, six triangular titanium implants were retrieved from six different patients at median 9 months from primary surgery. All six implants were scanned using microcomputed tomography. The presence or absence of bone in-growth, on-growth, and through-growth of the implants was evaluated as an indication of implant osseointegration. Three of six implants showed no or minor signs of osseointegration. Of the three remaining implants, one showed partial osseointegration and two implants showed high degrees of osseointegration. This study showed that triangular titanium implants can osseointegrate into host bone in humans. When osseointegration occurs, triangular titanium implants can give fusion across the sacroiliac joint.

The effect of minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion compared to sham operation: a double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial

Background

Minimally invasive fusion of the sacroiliac joint as treatment for low back pain may reduce pain and improve function compared to non-operative treatment, although clear evidence is lacking. The aim of this trial was to evaluate the effect of minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion compared to sham surgery on sacroiliac joint pain reduction.

Methods

In this double-blind randomized sham surgery-controlled trial patients with clinical diagnosis of sacroiliac joint pain confirmed with sacroiliac joint injection were included at two university hospitals in Sweden and Norway. Patients were randomized by the operating surgeon at each site to minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion or sham surgery. The primary endpoint was group difference in sacroiliac joint pain on the operated side at six months postoperatively, measured by the Numeric Rating Scale (0-10). Un-blinding and primary analysis were performed when all patients had completed six months follow-up. The trial is closed for new participants and was registered at clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03507049.

Findings

Between September 1st, 2018 and October 22nd, 2021, 63 patients were randomized, 32 to the surgical group, 31 to the sham group. Mean age was 45 years (range 26-63) and 59 of 63 (94%) patients were female. The mean reduction in the operated sacroiliac joint from baseline to six months postoperative was 2.6 Numeric Rating Scale points in the surgical group and 1.7 points in the sham group (mean between groups difference -1.0 points; 95% CI, -2.2 to 0.3; p = 0.13).

Interpretation

This double-blind randomized controlled trial could not prove that minimally invasive fusion of the sacroiliac joint was superior to sham surgery at six months postoperative.

Funding

Sophies Minde Ortopedi supported a clinical research position for Engelke Marie Randers. Region Stockholm supported the cost for the Swedish ethical application and a clinical research appointment for Paul Gerdhem.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Effect of sacroiliac fusion on gait, standing balance, and pelvic mobility for unilateral sacroiliac joint dysfunction

Background

Sacroiliac joint fusion (SIF) has been shown to effectively alleviate pain and improve functional deficits associated with sacroiliac joint dysfunction (SIJD). Previous studies have demonstrated significant improvements in gait function, however, none have reported both over-ground walking and quiescent standing, and additionally, none have included analysis of pelvic kinematics which may contain important information regarding pain avoidant compensatory behaviors. The purpose of this study was to identify objective functional differences between symptomatic and asymptomatic sides of unilateral sacroiliac joint dysfunction (SIJD) patients and to demonstrate the effectiveness of unilateral sacroiliac fusion (SIF) to improve gait and balance function compared to matched controls.

Methods

Thirteen unilateral SIJD patients were evaluated before and 6 months after SIF and were compared to matched asymptomatic controls. Pain and disability were assessed using visual analog scales and the Oswestry disability index respectively. Over ground walking and standing balance were assessed using 3D joint kinematics and kinetic ground reaction force analyses.

Results

Preoperatively, SIJD patients reported high levels of pain and disability and exhibited significant deficits in gait including elevated step width, reduced hip flexion/extension, and elevated pelvic motion as well as elevated center of pressure sway characteristics during standing. After unilateral SIF, patients reported significant reductions in pain and demonstrated significant improvements in gait including normalization of step width between sides and improved hip motion however elevated pelvic obliquity and rotation motion remained. Improvements in standing balance included reduced coronal sway characteristics and normalization of loading symmetry between sides.

Conclusion

Unilateral SIF resulted in significant improvements in both gait and balance function among SIJD patients to levels comparable to matched controls, however elevated pelvic motion remained. These findings help inform surgeons on the effectiveness of SIF for unilateral SIJD and provide important information regarding interpretation of functional outcomes.

Unobstructed orthopaedic surgical robot assisted percutaneous iliosacral screw fixation of sacral brittle fractures

Pelvic fractures mostly result from high-energy injuries in life; the longitudinal fracture of the sacrum is the most common type of sacrum fracture. This study was designed to evaluate the accuracy, safety, and efficacy of percutaneous sacroiliac joint screw placement in the treatment of longitudinal sacrum fractures with the assistance of unobstructed orthopaedic surgery robots. According to different surgical methods, 32 patients were divided into robot group and free hand group, with 16 patients in each group. The operation time, intra-operative blood loss, intra-operative fluoroscopy times, screw placement angle deviation were collected. There were statistically significant differences in terms of angle deviation of screw placement (1.96 ± 0.75° vs. 2.87 ± 1.03°; p = 0.0145), deviation of the guide needle (1.92 ± 0.93 mm vs. 2.91 ± 1.22 mm; p = 0.0209), intra-operative fluoroscopy time (7.25 ± 1.72 s vs. 20.93 ± 5.64 s; p = 0.0000), insertion time of each sacroiliac joint screw (14.72 ± 2.66 min vs. 29.21 ± 5.18 min; p = 0.0000). There was no statistically significant difference in terms of blood loss (100.21 ± 7.37 mL vs. 102.52 ± 8.15 mL; p = 0.4136). These results suggest that orthopaedic surgery robot for the treatment of longitudinal sacrum fracture is safer and provides less irradiation than the traditional freehand methods.

Posterior oblique technique for sacroiliac joint fusion leads to greater pain relief and similar improvement in function compared to the lateral technique: A retrospective, comparative study

Background

Management of chronic sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain among patients who do not respond to nonsurgical treatment is increasingly turning toward minimally invasive SIJ fusion. There are different techniques available to perform this procedure, with the lateral technique being more commonly studied than the posterior oblique technique. This study examined the effects of these techniques on pain relief and functional improvement, both preoperatively and at a 12-month follow-up.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study analyzed data from 45 patients who underwent SIJ fusion. Included patients were ≥50 years old, nonresponsive to conservative treatment. Subjects were divided into 2 cohorts based on the SIJ fusion technique. Primary outcomes were pain relief, measured by Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and functional improvement, determined by the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI); both were recorded and assessed at baseline, postoperative, and the change from pre- to postoperative. Additionally, data regarding patient demographics, previous lumbar fusion, operative time, and duration of hospital stay were collected and analyzed.

Results

Baseline demographic and clinical variables exhibited no significant differences in distribution between groups. The posterior oblique cohort demonstrated a substantial reduction in operative time (over 50%) and duration of hospital stay compared to lateral cohort. Pain relief (postoperative VAS: lateral 3.5±1.7 vs. posterior oblique 2.4±1.5 [p=.02]) and functional improvement (postoperative ODI: lateral 29.6±7.3 vs. posterior oblique 21±5.7 [p≤.001]) were significantly better in the posterior oblique group. Pre- to postoperative improvement analysis indicated greater reduction in pain (VAS: lateral -4.4±1.9 vs. posterior oblique -6.1±1.5 [p=.002]) in the posterior oblique group.

Conclusions

Compared to the lateral technique group, patients undergoing minimally invasive SIJ fusion through the posterior oblique technique experienced greater pain relief and demonstrated a trend toward better functional improvement, with shorter operative times and duration of hospital stay. The posterior oblique technique may be more efficient and beneficial to manage patients suffering from chronic SIJ pain through joint fusion.

Medicare Reimbursement Rates and Utilization Trends in Sacroiliac Joint Fusion

INTRODUCTION

Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) fusion is a surgical treatment option for SIJ pathology in select patients who have failed conservative management. More recently, minimally invasive surgical (MIS) techniques have been developed. This study aimed to determine the trends in procedure volume and reimbursement rates for SIJ fusion.

METHODS

Publicly available Medicare databases were assessed using the National Summary Data Files for 2010 to 2020. Files were organized according to current procedural terminology (CPT) codes. CPT codes specific to open and MIS SI joint fusion (27279 and 27280) were identified and tracked. To track surgeon reimbursements, the CMS Medicare Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool was used to extract facility prices. Descriptive statistics and linear regression were used to evaluate trends in procedure volume, utilization, and reimbursement rates. Compound annual growth rates were calculated, and discrepancies in inflation were corrected for using the Consumer Price Index.

RESULTS

A total of 33,963 SIJ fusions were conducted in the Medicare population between 2010 and 2020, with an overall increase in procedure volume of 2,350.9% from 318 cases in 2010 to 7,794 in 2020. Since the introduction of the 27279 CPT code in 2015, 8,806 cases (31.5%) have been open and 19,120 (68.5%) have been MIS. Surgeon reimbursement for open fusions increased nominally by 42.8% (inflation-adjusted increase of 20%) from $998 in 2010 to $1,425 in 2020. Meanwhile, reimbursement for MIS fusion experienced a nominal increase of 58.4% (inflation-adjusted increase of 44.9%) from $582 in 2015 to $922 in 2020.

CONCLUSION

SIJ fusion volume in the Medicare population has increased substantially in the past 10 years, with MIS SIJ fusion accounting for most of the procedures since the introduction of the 27279 CPT code in 2015. Reimbursement rates for surgeons have also increased for both open and MIS procedures, even after adjusting for inflation.

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.

MRI-guided sacroiliac joint injections in children and adults: current practice and future developments

Common etiologies of low back pain include degenerative arthrosis and inflammatory arthropathy of the sacroiliac joints. The diagnostic workup revolves around identifying and confirming the sacroiliac joints as a pain generator. Diagnostic sacroiliac joint injections often serve as functional additions to the diagnostic workup through eliciting a pain response that tests the hypothesis that the sacroiliac joints do or do not contribute to the patient's pain syndrome. Therapeutic sacroiliac joint injections aim to provide medium- to long-term relief of symptoms and reduce inflammatory activity and, ultimately, irreversible structural damage. Ultrasonography, fluoroscopy, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may be used to guide sacroiliac joint injections. The populations that may benefit most from MRI-guided sacroiliac joint procedures include children, adolescents, adults of childbearing age, and patients receiving serial injections due to the ability of interventional MRI to avoid radiation exposure. Most clinical wide-bore MRI systems can be used for MRI-guided sacroiliac joint injections. Turbo spin echo pulse sequences optimized for interventional needle display visualize the needle tip with an error margin of < 1 mm or less. Published success rates of intra-articular sacroiliac joint drug delivery with MRI guidance range between 87 and 100%. The time required for MR-guided sacroiliac joint injections in adults range between 23-35 min and 40 min in children. In this article, we describe techniques for MRI-guided sacroiliac joint injections, share our practice of incorporating interventional MRI in the care of patients with sacroiliac joint mediated pain, discuss the rationales, benefits, and limitations of interventional MRI, and conclude with future developments.