17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Effectiveness of Lumbar Facet Joint Blocks and Predictive Value before Radiofrequency Denervation : The Facet Treatment Study (FACTS), a Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background:

          With facet interventions under scrutiny, the authors’ objectives were to determine the effectiveness of different lumbar facet blocks and their ability to predict radiofrequency ablation outcomes.

          Methods:

          A total of 229 participants were randomized in a 2:2:1 ratio to receive intraarticular facet injections with bupivacaine and steroid, medial branch blocks, or saline. Those with a positive 1-month outcome (a 2-point or more reduction in average pain score) and score higher than 3 (positive satisfaction) on a 5-point satisfaction scale were followed up to 6 months. Participants in the intraarticular and medial branch block groups with a positive diagnostic block (50% or more relief) who experienced a negative outcome proceeded to the second phase and underwent radiofrequency ablation, while all saline group individuals underwent ablation. Coprimary outcome measures were average numerical rating scale pain scores 1 month after the facet or saline blocks and 3 months after ablation.

          Results:

          Mean reduction in average numerical rating scale pain score at 1 month was 0.7 ± 1.6 in the intraarticular group, 0.7 ± 1.8 in the medial branch block group, and 0.7 ± 1.5 in the placebo group; P = 0.993. The proportions of positive blocks were higher in the intraarticular (54%) and medial branch (55%) groups than in the placebo group (30%; P = 0.01). Radiofrequency ablation was performed on 135 patients (45, 48, and 42 patients from the intraarticular, medial branch, and saline groups, respectively). The average numerical rating scale pain score at 3 months was 3.0 ± 2.0 in the intraarticular, 3.2 ± 2.5 in the medial branch, and 3.5 ± 1.9 in the control group ( P = 0.493). At 3 months, the proportions of positive responders in the intraarticular, medial branch block, and placebo groups were 51%, 56%, and 24% for the intraarticular, medial branch, and placebo groups, respectively ( P = 0.005).

          Conclusions:

          This study establishes that facet blocks are not therapeutic. The higher responder rates in the treatment groups suggest a hypothesis that facet blocks might provide prognostic value before radiofrequency ablation.

          Related collections

          Most cited references40

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Radiofrequency treatment relieves chronic knee osteoarthritis pain: a double-blind randomized controlled trial.

          Chronic osteoarthritis (OA) pain of the knee is often not effectively managed with current non-pharmacological or pharmacological treatments. Radiofrequency (RF) neurotomy is a therapeutic alternative for chronic pain. We investigated whether RF neurotomy applied to articular nerve branches (genicular nerves) was effective in relieving chronic OA knee joint pain. The study involved 38 elderly patients with (a) severe knee OA pain lasting more than 3 months, (b) positive response to a diagnostic genicular nerve block and (c) no response to conservative treatments. Patients were randomly assigned to receive percutaneous RF genicular neurotomy under fluoroscopic guidance (RF group; n=19) or the same procedure without effective neurotomy (control group; n=19). Visual analogue scale (VAS), Oxford knee scores, and global perceived effect on a 7-point scale were measured at baseline and at 1, 4, and 12weeks post-procedure. VAS scores showed that the RF group had less knee joint pain at 4 (p<0.001) and 12 (p<0.001) weeks compared with the control group. Oxford knee scores showed similar findings (p<0.001). In the RF group, 10/17 (59%), 11/17 (65%) and 10/17 (59%) achieved at least 50% knee pain relief at 1, 4, and 12 weeks, respectively. No patient reported a post-procedure adverse event during the follow-up period. RF neurotomy of genicular nerves leads to significant pain reduction and functional improvement in a subset of elderly chronic knee OA pain, and thus may be an effective treatment in such cases. Further trials with larger sample size and longer follow-up are warranted. Copyright © 2010 International Association for the Study of Pain. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Percutaneous radio-frequency neurotomy for chronic cervical zygapophyseal-joint pain.

            Chronic pain in the cervical zygapohyseal joints is a common problem after whiplash injury, but treatment is difficult. Percutaneous radiofrequency neurotomy can relieve the pain by denaturing the nerves innervating the painful joint, but the efficacy of this treatment has not been established. In a randomized, double-blind trial, we compared percutaneous radio-frequency neurotomy in which multiple lesions were made and the temperature of the electrode making the lesions was raised to 80 degrees C with a control treatment using an identical procedure except that the radio-frequency current was not turned on. We studied 24 patients (9 men and 15 women; mean age, 43 years) who had pain in one or more cervical zygapophyseal joints after an automobile accident (median duration of pain, 34 months). The source of their pain had been identified with the use of double-blind, placebo-controlled local anesthesia. Twelve patients received each treatment. The patients were followed by telephone interviews and clinic visits until they reported that their pain had returned to 50 percent of the preoperative level. The median time that elapsed before the pain returned to at least 50 percent of the preoperative level was 263 days in the active-treatment group and 8 days in the control group (P=0.04). At 27 weeks, seven patients in the active-treatment group and one patient in the control group were free of pain. Five patients in the active-treatment group had numbness in the territory of the treated nerves, but none considered it troubling. In patients with chronic cervical zygapophyseal-joint pain confirmed with double-blind, placebo-controlled local anesthesia, percutaneous radio-frequency neurotomy with multiple lesions of target nerves can provide lasting relief.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Surgery versus conservative management of sciatica due to a lumbar herniated disc: a systematic review

              The effectiveness of surgery in patients with sciatica due to lumbar disc herniations is not without dispute. The goal of this study was to assess the effects of surgery versus conservative therapy (including epidural injections) for patients with sciatica due to lumbar disc herniation. A comprehensive search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and PEDro up to October 2009. Randomised controlled trials of adults with lumbar radicular pain, which evaluated at least one clinically relevant outcome measure (pain, functional status, perceived recovery, lost days of work) were included. Two authors assessed risk of bias according to Cochrane criteria and extracted the data. In total, five studies were identified, two of which with a low risk of bias. One study compared early surgery with prolonged conservative care followed by surgery if needed; three studies compared surgery with usual conservative care, and one study compared surgery with epidural injections. Data were not pooled because of clinical heterogeneity and poor reporting of data. One large low-risk-of-bias trial demonstrated that early surgery in patients with 6–12 weeks of radicular pain leads to faster pain relief when compared with prolonged conservative treatment, but there were no differences after 1 and 2 years. Another large low-risk-of-bias trial between surgery and usual conservative care found no statistically significant differences on any of the primary outcome measures after 1 and 2 years. Future studies should evaluate who benefits more from surgery and who from conservative care.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                1300217
                533
                Anesthesiology
                Anesthesiology
                Anesthesiology
                0003-3022
                1528-1175
                20 April 2019
                September 2018
                01 September 2019
                : 129
                : 3
                : 517-535
                Affiliations
                Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Neurology and Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, The Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland; Deptartment of Anesthesiology, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland
                Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, The Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
                Department of Surgery, Landstuhl, Regional Medical Center, Landstuhl, Germany
                Department of Neurology, District of Columbia Veterans Affairs Hospital, Washington, District of Columbia
                Anesthesia Service, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland
                Parkway Neuroscience and Spine Institute, Hagerstown, Maryland
                Deptartment of Anesthesiology, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland; Department of Surgery, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland
                Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland; Department of Surgery and Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland
                Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland; Department of Surgery, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland
                Puget Sound Veteran’s Hospital, Seattle, Washington; Department of Anesthesiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
                Pain Medicine Center, Deptartment of Anesthesiology, Naval Medical Center-San Diego, San Diego, California
                Department of Pain Medicine, David Grant U.S. Air Force Medical Center, Travis Air Force Base, California; Departments of Anesthesiology and Neurology, Penn State Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, Pennsylavania
                Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, The Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland; Pain Treatment Center, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland
                Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, The Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
                Pain Treatment Center, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland
                Parkway Neuroscience and Spine Institute, Hagerstown, Maryland
                Deptartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland; Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Service, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland
                Author notes
                Correspondence Address correspondence to Dr. Cohen: 550 North Broadway, Suite 301, Baltimore, Maryland 21029. scohen40@ 123456jhmi.edu .
                Article
                PMC6543534 PMC6543534 6543534 nihpa1024147
                10.1097/ALN.0000000000002274
                6543534
                29847426
                5f485a14-3428-4dff-9ab6-be8517a3a642
                History
                Categories
                Article

                Comments

                Comment on this article