Lower effectiveness of facet joint infiltration in patients with concurrent facet joint degeneration and active endplate changes

Osteoarthritis year in review 2023: Imaging

PURPOSE

This narrative review summarizes the original research in the field of in vivo osteoarthritis (OA) imaging between 1 January 2022 and 1 April 2023.

METHODS

A PubMed search was conducted using the following several terms pertaining to OA imaging, including but not limited to "Osteoarthritis / OA", "Magnetic resonance imaging / MRI", "X-ray" "Computed tomography / CT", "artificial intelligence /AI", "deep learning", "machine learning". This review is organized by topics including the anatomical structure of interest and modality, AI, challenges of OA imaging in the context of clinical trials, and imaging biomarkers in clinical trials and interventional studies. Ex vivo and animal studies were excluded from this review.

RESULTS

Two hundred and forty-nine publications were relevant to in vivo human OA imaging. Among the articles included, the knee joint (61%) and MRI (42%) were the predominant anatomical area and imaging modalities studied. Marked heterogeneity of structural tissue damage in OA knees was reported, a finding of potential relevance to clinical trial inclusion. The use of AI continues to rise rapidly to be applied in various aspect of OA imaging research but a lack of generalizability beyond highly standardized datasets limit interpretation and wide-spread application. No pharmacologic clinical trials using imaging data as outcome measures have been published in the period of interest.

CONCLUSIONS

Recent advances in OA imaging continue to heavily weigh on the use of AI. MRI remains the most important modality with a growing role in outcome prediction and classification.

Modic changes as seen on MRI are associated with nonspecific chronic lower back pain and disability

BACKGROUND

Estimating the contribution of endplate oedema known as Modic changes to lower back pain (LBP) has been the subject of multiple observational studies and reviews, some of which conclude that the evidence for an association of Modic change with LBP is uncertain while others demonstrate a clear link. The clinical trials demonstrating the benefit of basivertebral nerve ablation, a therapeutic intervention, in a tightly defined homogenous patient group with chronic LBP and Modic changes type 1 or type 2, provides further evidence for the contribution of Modic changes to LBP and shows that in these subjects, nerve ablation substantially reduces pain and disability. These interventional studies provide direct evidence that Modic changes can be associated with lower back pain and disability. This review set out to explore why the literature to date has been conflicting.

METHODS

A narrative, forensic, non-systematic literature review of selected articles to investigate why the published literature investigating the association between Modic imaging changes and chronic low back pain is inconsistent.

RESULTS

This review found that previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses included both heterogeneous study designs and diverse patient syndromes resulting in an inconsistent association between Modic changes and nonspecific chronic lower back pain. Re-analysis of literature data focussing on more homogenous patient populations provides clearer evidence that Modic changes are associated with nonspecific chronic lower back pain and that type 1 Modic changes are more painful than type 2.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies using tightly defined homogenous patient groups may provide the best test for association between MRI-findings and pain and disability. Clinical benefit of basivertebral nerve ablation observed in randomised controlled trials further supports the association between type 1 and type 2 Modic changes with pain and disability.

Evaluating Nonoperative Treatment for Low Back Pain in the Presence of Modic Changes: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to summarize and assess the current literature evaluating nonoperative treatments for patients with Modic changes (MCs) and low back pain (LBP).

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The PubMed database was searched from its inception until May 1, 2022 for studies evaluating MC and clinical outcomes. Key findings, treatment details, and patient information were extracted from included studies. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies were included in this review, encompassing a total of 2452 patients, 1713 of whom displayed baseline MC. Seventy-eight percent of studies were high quality. Of included studies, 2 evaluated antibiotics, 5 evaluated steroid injections, 6 evaluated conservative therapies, and 5 evaluated other treatment modalities. Antibiotics and bisphosphonates improved treatment in patients with MC. Patients with MC without disc herniation benefited from conservative therapy, while those with Type I Modic changes and disc herniation experienced poorer improvement. Significant variability exists in reported outcomes following steroid injections.

CONCLUSIONS

Nonoperative therapy may provide patients with MC with significant benefits. Patients may benefit from therapies not traditionally utilized for LBP such as antibiotics or bisphosphonates, but conservative therapy is not recommended for patients with concomitant MC and disc herniation. The large variation in follow-up times and outcome measures contributes to significant heterogeneity in studies and inability to predict long-term patient outcomes. More long-term studies are needed to assess nonoperative treatments for LBP in patients with MC.