Cervical Medial Branch Blocks Research Articles

Prospective evaluation of the safety of ultrasound-guided cervical medial branch blocks using the in-plane technique

BackgroundWhile fluoroscopic guidance is currently the imaging standard for cervical medial branch blocks (CMBBs), ultrasound guidance (USG) offers several potential safety advantages such as real-time needle visualization and the ability...

Accuracy and efficacy of ultrasound-guided puncture (vs. computed tomography-guided) in cervical medial branch blocks for cervicogenic pain: A randomized controlled study.

Cervical medial branch block (CMBB) has been recognized as an effective treatment for cervicogenic pain. Previous studies mostly used ultrasound-guided out-of-plane puncture for CMBB, while this prospective study was designed to investigate the efficacy of ultrasound-guided in-plane puncture, specifically focusing on the new target of CMBB for cervical pain. This study includes two parts: the accuracy study (N = 15, CMBB was completed by ultrasound and confirmed by computed tomography [CT], in which a good distribution percentage of the analgesic solution was observed) and the efficacy study (N = 40, CMBB was completed by ultrasound or CT, while the proportion of pain relief (numerical rating scale) decrease by more than 50% postoperatively was analyzed). The results showed that the good distribution percentage of the analgesic solution was 97.8%. Furthermore, in the early period (30 min and 2 h postoperatively), the proportion of patients with pain relief was lower in the ultrasound group than that in the CT group, especially at 2 h postoperatively (52% vs. 94%). However, at 24 h postoperatively and later, the proportion of patients with pain relief gradually stabilized to about 60%-70%, and lasted for about 2 weeks to 1 month. Therefore, the new target for CMBB, guided by ultrasound in-plane, offers high visibility and accuracy. A single CMBB performed under ultrasound guidance resulted in pain relief comparable to that of a CT-guided procedure (1 day to 1 month postoperatively). This study indicated that CMBB guided by ultrasound in-plane could be regarded as a promising approach for treatment of cervicogenic pain.

Letter to the Editor Regarding “Comparative Outcome of Lidocaine versus Bupivacaine for Cervical Medial Branch Block in Chronic Cervical Facet Arthropathy: A Randomized Double-Blind Study”

Letter to the Editor Regarding “Comparative Outcome of Lidocaine versus Bupivacaine for Cervical Medial Branch Block in Chronic Cervical Facet Arthropathy: A Randomized Double-Blind Study”

In Reply to the Letter to the Editor Regarding “Comparative Outcome of Lidocaine versus Bupivacaine for Cervical Medial Branch Block in Chronic Cervical Facet Arthropathy: A Randomized Double-Blind Study”

In Reply to the Letter to the Editor Regarding “Comparative Outcome of Lidocaine versus Bupivacaine for Cervical Medial Branch Block in Chronic Cervical Facet Arthropathy: A Randomized Double-Blind Study”

Comparative Outcome of Lidocaine Versus Bupivacaine for Cervical Medial Branch Block in Chronic Cervical Facet Arthropathy: A Randomized Double-Blind Study

This study evaluated the effect of prolonged concordant response and functional clinical improvement between lidocaine and bupivacaine for cervical medial branch block (CMBB) in chronic cervical facet syndrome. Sixty-two patients diagnosed with chronic cervical facet syndrome were randomized into either lidocaine or bupivacaine groups. The therapeutic CMBB was performed under ultrasound guidance. Either 2% lidocaine or 0.5% bupivacaine with a volume of 0.5-1 ml per level, according to the patient's pain symptoms. The patients, pain assessor, and pain specialist were blinded. The primary outcome was the duration of pain reduction by at least 50%. The numerical rating scale (NRS) of 0-10 and the Neck Disability Index (NDI) questionnaire were recorded. There was no significant difference in the duration of 50% and 75% pain reduction and NDI between the lidocaine and bupivacaine groups. Lidocaine provided significant pain reduction up to 16 weeks (P<0.05) and significant improvement in neck functional outcomes up to 8 weeks (P<0.01) compared to the baseline. Whist bupivacaine yielded significant pain alleviation for up to 8 weeks for pain upon neck mobilization (P<0.05) and demonstrated notable improvement in neck function up to 4 weeks (P<0.01) compared to the baseline. CMBB using lidocaine or bupivacaine provided clinical benefits in prolonged analgesic effect and improving neck functions for chronic cervical facet syndrome. Lidocaine illustrated better performance and could be considered a local anesthetic of choice regarding the prolonged concordance response.

The Negative Screening Rate of Second Cervical Medial Branch Blocks in Patients With Positive First Blocks: A Retrospective Chart Review

The Negative Screening Rate of Second Cervical Medial Branch Blocks in Patients With Positive First Blocks: A Retrospective Chart Review

Factfinders for patient safety: Anticoagulant and antiplatelet agents and cervical medial branch procedures

This series of FactFinders presents a brief summary of the evidence and outlines recommendations regarding the safety of anticoagulant and antiplatelet agents for cervical medial branch blocks and cervical medial branch radiofrequency neurotomy.The evidence in support of the following facts is presented: (1) In patients maintained on therapeutic anticoagulant (AC) and/or antiplatelet (AP) therapy, for whom cervical medial branch blocks (CMBBs) are being considered, there is strong evidence to guide decisions on continuing or discontinuing these AC/AP agents in preparation for the procedure. (2) Therapeutic anticoagulation (AC) and antiplatelet (APT) agents should be discontinued prior to cervical medial branch radiofrequency neurotomy (CMBRFN) due to serious hemorrhagic risks.

Cervical facet joint platelet-rich plasma in people with chronic whiplash-associated disorders: A prospective case series of short-term outcomes

ObjectiveTo explore the safety and feasibility of a single autologous injection of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in cervical facet joints of people with chronic WAD and facet-mediated pain, and explore the association between pain relief reported with diagnostic medial branch blocks (MBBs) and 3-months post-PRP. DesignA prospective case series of people with chronic whiplash-associated disorders and cervical facet joint mediated pain in a community setting. InterventionsA single autologous PRP injection was provided to cervical facet joints under ultrasound and fluoroscopic guidance. MeasuresAdverse events were recorded one-week, and measures of pain (numerical pain rating scale - NPRS) and disability (Neck Disability Index - NDI) were collected prior to and 3-months following cervical facet joint PRP. People not reached for follow-up were considered failures for worst-case analysis. The correlation between percentage response to diagnostic cervical medial branch blocks (MBBs) and percentage pain relief reported at 3-months was also investigated. ResultsForty-four people (82% female; mean age (SD): 45.2 (10.8) years) underwent cervical facet joint PRP. There was a significant improvement in pain and disability following PRP. Seventy percent of people exceeded MCID for pain. For NDI scores, 80% of people exceeded MCID. Forty-one percent of people reported greater than 50% relief of pain 3-months post-cervical facet joint PRP.There was no significant correlation between percentage relief of pain with cervical MBBs and percentage relief of pain 3-months post-PRP (r ​= ​0.06, p ​= ​0.73).There were no adverse events reported. ConclusionIn people with chronic WAD and facet-mediated pain, preliminary data suggests that PRP is safe and it is feasible to move forwards with randomized studies to further investigate efficacy and effectiveness.

An Examination of the Risks Associated with Cervical Medial Branch Blocks and Cervical Facet Joint Injections in Patients on Antithrombotics

An Examination of the Risks Associated with Cervical Medial Branch Blocks and Cervical Facet Joint Injections in Patients on Antithrombotics

Cervical medial branch block progression to radiofrequency neurotomy: A retrospective clinical audit

BackgroundChronic axial neck pain (CANP) due to zygapophysial joint arthropathy is best diagnosed via cervical medial branch block (MBB). However, the paradigm by which MBB is used to select patients for cervical radiofrequency neurotomy (RFN) is contested. Dual diagnostic cervical MBB with a minimum of ≥80% pain relief to diagnose cervical zygapophysial joint pain has been accepted by some Medicare Local Coverage Determinations as the method for selecting patients for cervical RFN. There are some who would argue that the utility of the dual diagnostic MBB and the ≥80% pain relief cut off lacks utility in clinical practice. The suspicion being those who progress from MBB1 to MBB2 will then flow from MBB2 to RFN without fail. Does clinical practice using dual diagnostic MBBs and using an ≥80% pain relief cut off reduce patient eligibility for cervical RFN after both MBB1 and MBB2? MethodsA retrospective clinical audit was carried out at an academic institution spine center from January 1st to December 31st, 2019. Charts were selected based on Current Procedural Terminology codes for MBB, then included if the cervical medial branches were targeted. Charts were then reviewed for procedural progression. Results21/51 (24%, 95% Confidence Interval 12-35%) patients progressed from MBB1 to MBB2. Of those 21 patients, 13 patients progressed from MBB2 to RFN (62%, 95% CI 41-83%). In total, 13/51 (14%, 95% CI 14-37%) patients who were initially suspected to have CANP due to zygapophysial joint pain progressed to RFN. Both MBB1 and MBB2 hindered the progression of 30/51 patients (59%, 95% CI 45-72%) and 8/21 patients (38%, 95% CI 17-59%), respectively. ConclusionBoth MBB1 and MBB2 served to filter patients from progression to RFN using dual MBBs with an ≥80% pain relief cutoff.

Beware the Wandering Needle: Inadvertent Intramedullary Injection During an Attempted Cervical Medial Branch Block

A 27-year-old man developed sudden neck pain, severe quadriparesis, and right shoulder allodynia during an outpatient cervical medial branch block procedure. Cervical spine imaging revealed evidence of an interlaminar needle trajectory with abnormal signal in the right hemicord at the level of C4, consistent with intramedullary injection and contusion. Following a 48-hour stay in the intensive care unit, during which hemodynamic vasopressor support was administered to optimize spinal cord perfusion, the patient exhibited almost complete neurologic recovery with resolution of the neuropathic pain. He was eventually discharged home and underwent outpatient physical therapy for a mild residual right hemiparesis.

Assessment of Prevalence of Cervical Facet Joint Pain with Diagnostic Cervical Medial Branch Blocks: Analysis Based on Chronic Pain Model

Research into cervical spinal pain syndromes has indicated that the cervical facet joints can be a potent source of neck pain, headache, and referred pain into the upper extremities. There have been multiple diagnostic accuracy studies, most commonly utilizing diagnostic facet joint nerve blocks and an acute pain model, as Bogduk has proposed. Subsequently, Manchikanti has focused on the importance of the chronic pain model and longer lasting relief with diagnostic blocks. To assess diagnostic accuracy of cervical facet joint nerve blocks with controlled comparative local anesthetic blocks, with updated assessment of prevalence, false-positive rate, and a description of philosophical paradigm shift from acute to chronic pain model, with concordant pain relief. This diagnostic accuracy study was performed with retrospective assessment of data to assess prevalence and false-positive rates. The study was performed in a non-university-based, multidisciplinary, interventional pain management, private practice in the United States. Cervical medial branch blocks were performed utilizing lidocaine 1% followed by bupivacaine 0.25% when appropriate response was obtained in an operating room under fluoroscopic guidance with 0.5 mL of lidocaine or bupivacaine from C3-C6 medial branches (levels blocked on joints involved). If a patient failed to respond to lidocaine with appropriate >= 80% pain relief, that patient was considered as negative for facet joint pain. If the response was positive with lidocaine block, a bupivacaine block was performed. The chronic cervical facet joint pain was diagnosed with cervical facet joint nerve blocks at a prevalence of 49.3% (95% CI, 43.6%, 55.0%) and with a false-positive rate of 25.6% (95% CI, 19.5%, 32.8%). This study also showed a single block prevalence rate of 66.3% (95% CI, 71.7%, 60.9%). Assessment of the duration of relief with each block showed greater than 80% for 6 days with lidocaine block and total relief of >= 50% of 31 days. In contrast, with bupivacaine, average duration of pain relief of >= 80% was 12 days with a total relief of >= 50% lasting for 55 days. Based on this investigation, utilizing a chronic pain model, there was significant difference in the relief patterns. This assessment showed prevalence and false-positive rates of 49.3% and 25.6% in chronic neck pain. Duration of relief >= 80% pain relief was 6 days with lidocaine and 12 days with bupivacaine, with total relief of >= 50% of 31 days with 55 days respectively.

A Critical Look at the Data Supporting Ultrasound Guided Cervical Medial Branch Blocks

According to guidelines published by the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians in 2013 ‎1, ‎2, the current evidence for cervical facet joint injections is fair. Yet the volume of these procedures continues to rise ‎3. There is a need for a more critical appraisal of the benefit, technique and adverse effects associated with cervical spine injections. The systematic review and meta-analysis by Paredes et al ‎4 seeks to better assess the evidence for use of ultrasound (US) guidance with cervical medial branch blocks. This article is also a response to a recently published critique by Schneider et al ‎5 raising concerns about the paucity of evidence evaluating the safety, accuracy, and effectiveness of US-guided cervical spine procedures.

Ultrasound-Guided Cervical Medial Branch Blocks: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective: Cervical medial branch blocks (CMBBs) are useful in differentiating facetogenic pain from other sources of cervicogenic headaches and neck pain. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to determine the efficacy, performance time, pain reduction, and adverse events associated with ultrasound (US) guided CMBB compared with other commonly used guidance methods such as fluoroscopy and computed tomography (CT). Methods: Searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Ovid were completed to identify studies addressing CMBBs utilizing ultrasound compared to other imaging techniques. Three reviewers independently screened the titles, abstracts, and full texts, extracting data from eligible studies. Outcomes of interest including success rate, efficacy, performance time and complication profile were analyzed in meta-analysis. All other reported measures and complication profiles were analyzed descriptively. Results: A total of 9 studies were included. Four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 5 cohort studies satisfied inclusion criteria. US-guided CMBBs demonstrated similar success rates (OR = 1.05, 95% CI = 0.15 to 7.52, z = 0.05, P = 0.96) and similar pain efficacy (SMD = -0.54, 95% CI = -1.91 to 0.83, z = - 0.77, P = 0.44) compared to traditional guidance techniques. However, US-guided CMBBs demonstrated reduced performance time (SMD = -1.77, 95% CI = -2.65 to -0.89, z = -3.94, P &lt;0.01) and rate of vascular injury/injection (OR = 0.09, 95% CI = 0.01 to 0.75, z = -2.23, P = 0.03) compared to fluoroscopy guided CMBBs. Conclusion: This review and meta-analysis demonstrated that US-guided cervical medial branch blocks are a reliable alternative to fluoroscopy- and CT-guided CMBBs, with similar efficacy but a potentially improved safety and performance time.

CT guided cervical medial branch block and radiofrequency ablation

The purpose of this report is to describe the procedure for CT fluoroscopy– guided Cervical medial branch block and facet radiofrequency ablation. CT fluoroscopic guidance allows more-precise needle tip positioning with visualization of bony landmarks and at the same time be aware of the adjoining soft tissue anatomy with good localization of adjacent critical non-targeted areas such as the neural foramina and the dorsal root ganglia. This serves as an alternative method for performing medial branch blocks and facet radiofrequency ablation.

Comparison of cervical medial branch nerve block versus trigger point injection in patients with chronic neck pain

Background: Annual prevalence of chronic neck pain in general population averages between 30%-50%. Among various causes of chronic neck pain cervical facet joint involvement accounts for about 54% to 67%. Interventional procedures such as medial branch nerve block, trigger point injections and dry needling have been described for management of chronic neck pain. Objectives: To determine the clinical effectiveness of cervical medial branch block and trigger point injections in the management chronic neck pain. Design: Randomized, double blinded, prospective study conducted at two different centers in India, Pain Clinic, Department of Anaesthesiology, J.N. Medical College hospital, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, Delhi Pain management centre, New Delhi, India. Methods: Data analysis was done from a total of 60 patients with 30 patients in each group. Group CMB received cervical medial branch block and group TP received trigger point injection with levobupivacaine (0.25%) and triamcinolone (20mg) at two different levels. There was no sham group. Outcome Measure: Numeric rating scale (NRS), Neck Pain Disability Index (NDI), weekly analgesic requirement and subjective evaluation of patients was done at 1st week, 3rd week, 6th week and 12th week of follow up and compared with the pre-procedure value. Results: Significant pain relief was observed in both the groups of study, at 1st week of study, compared to baseline. Further follow up showed significantly better pain relief in patients receiving medial branch nerve block than patient receiving tender point injections at 3rd, 6th week and 12th week. NDI score in-group CMB was significantly better as compared to group TP at 3rd, 6th and 12th week follow up. Subjective evaluation of pain showed significantly greater proportion of patient with good to excellent pain relief in group receiving medial branch block. Analgesic requirement was significantly less in group CMB compared to group TP during follow up. Conclusion: Cervical medial branch block with local anaesthetic and steroid may provide long-term relief in patients with chronic neck pain than trigger point injection with no major incidence of complications in either group.

Cervical Medial Branch Block Volume Dependent Dispersion Patterns as a Predictor for Ablation Success: A Cadaveric Study.

Neck pain is one of the most common causes of chronic pain and the fourth leading cause of disability worldwide; it is estimated that between 36% and 67% of this pain is due to facet arthropathy. For patients who have pain refractory to conservative treatments literature supports management with diagnostic cervical medial branch blocks (MBBs) to identify the associated facet innervation as the source of pain followed by therapeutic radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of the identified nerves. Cervical RFA has good published outcomes; however, the procedure is dependent upon the specificity of the diagnostic block to achieve maximal success. Currently, this prerequisite test has false positive rates between 27% and 63% and recent studies have shown that this may, in part, be a consequence of currently accepted injection volumes of 0.50 mL or more, which may decrease the sensitivity of MBBs. To evaluate the possible differences in volume dispersion between 0.25 and 0.50 mL of injectate during cervical MBBs. Cadaveric study. An academic medical center in the United States. Not applicable. This was a cadaveric study in which six subjects were chosen with intact cervical spines. Cervical MBB were performed bilaterally at the midcervical spine, using a posterior approach under fluoroscopic guidance. 0.25 or 0.50 mL of a 9:1 solution of Omnipaque 180 mg iodine/mL and 1% medical grade methylene blue were administered on the left and right sides, respectively. Postinjection computed tomography (CT) imaging and gross dissection were performed to assess injectate spread. Outcome measures after using commonly injected volumes for cervical MBB, included visualized and measured spread (by CT and gross dissection) of cervical medial branch blocks, coating adjacent structures not targeted by RFA. Postinjection CT imaging and cadaveric dissection demonstrated that, although both volumes adequately coated the medial branches, the 0.50 mL cohort reliably spread dorsally to superficial muscles (splenius) and nerves distant from the targeted nerves (dorsal motor branches to splenius), whereas the 0.25 mL injectate cohort was contained in the deep and intermediate muscular cervical layers directly juxtaposed to the targeted cMBBs. Results suggest that 0.50 mL injections of local anesthetic during cervical MBBs contacts many nonintended targets, thus decreasing the specificity of a targeted diagnostic cervical MBB. Furthermore, we demonstrated that 0.25 mL of injectate reliably bathed the cervical medial branches without extensive extravasation. This indicates that there would potentially be fewer local anesthetic effects on distant tissues, increasing the specificity of cervical MBBs and likely improving RFA planning.

Postdural Puncture Headache after Cervical Medial Branch Block

Postdural Puncture Headache after Cervical Medial Branch Block

Improving Fluoroscopic Visualization for Lower Cervical Medial Branch Blocks with a Modified Swimmer’s View: A Technical Report

Neural blockade of the cervical medial branches is a validated procedure in the diagnosis and treatment of cervical zygapophyseal joint pain. Fluoroscopic visualization of the lower cervical medial branch target zones (CMBTZs) in lateral view is sometimes challenging or not possible due to the patient's shoulders obscuring the target. Large shoulders and short necks often exacerbate the problem. Clear visualization is critical to accuracy and safety. We aim to describe a method for optimal fluoroscopic visualization of the lower CMBTZs using a modified swimmer's view. A technical report. A private practice. Discussion with accompanying fluoroscopic images of the cervical spine, focusing on the lateral aspects of the lower cervical articular pillars in both the traditional lateral view and modified swimmer's view. Four authors served as volunteers for undergoing fluoroscopic x-rays in both views. Visualization of each lower CMBTZ was attempted and stored. The most caudal, clearly visualized levels were compared in both views for each participant. Visualization of the lower CMBTZs can be successfully obtained with the modified swimmer's view and in select patients is superior to a lateral view. A limitation to this study is the design as a technical report. A future prospective study is warranted. Modified swimmer's view can serve as a primary method of visualizing the lower CMBTZs or an alternate view when a lateral view is unable to clearly demonstrate target landmarks. This can improve the ease, accuracy, and safety of performing diagnostic cervical medial branch blocks (CMBBs). Swimmer's view, cervical medial branch block, facet joint, fluoroscopy.

Response to Cervical Medial Branch Blocks In Patients with Cervicogenic Vertigo

Among the various causes of vertigo, the so-called cervicogenic vertigo (CV) has been the most controversial. However, perturbations of proprioceptive signals and abnormal activity of the cervical afferents can induce vertigo. Medial branch blocks (MBBs) are a diagnostic tool designed to test whether a patient's neck pain is mediated by one or more of the medial branches of the dorsal rami of the spinal nerve. It is unknown whether MBBs are also suitable for testing symptoms other than pain. The purpose of this study was to test whether MBBs of the cervical spine can be used as a diagnostic tool to identify patients with CV. A retrospective practice audit (clinical observation). An interventional pain management and spine practice. An electronic medical record system was used to identify patients in a single spine center. Included were consecutive patients with neck pain and vertigo, who had received cervical MBBs in a period from July 2001 to April 2016. The patients were tested with a MBB of about 1 mL of bupivacaine (0.25%) and 20 mg triamcinolone. Injections were performed with fluoroscopic visualization using established techniques in 2 or 3 levels on one or both sides. Vertigo was analyzed through the global clinical impression of the patient (i.e., "gone," "better," "the same," or "worse"). One-hundred seventy-eight patients met the inclusion criteria. One-hundred eleven patients (62.4%) experienced a significant improvement of the vertigo. In 47 patients (26.4%), no information about the vertigo was available at follow-up; these patients were assumed to have no improvement (worst-case scenario). Hence, altogether 67 patients (37.6%) had a negative result. The median relief of the vertigo was 2 months. Differences in age, gender, level of treatment, or pain duration between patients with relief of the vertigo and without relief were not found. Nine patients with a whiplash injury in their medical history were also tested. They experienced a lower success rate and had longer duration of pain before the treatment; however, these differences are not statistically significant. It was the primary intention to treat neck pain; the assessment of vertigo was an additional aim. Therefore, the history taken and the clinical examination were not targeted specifically to vertigo. A placebo effect cannot be excluded. Further studies with the primary focus on CV are necessary to prove the significance of MBBs. This is the first study to demonstrate that MBBs of the cervical spine can be a useful tool for the diagnosis of CV, because they temporarily block cervical afferents. In 63.4% of patients with neck pain and suspected CV, the vertigo was significantly improved. Further placebo-controlled studies with the primary intention on CV are necessary to prove the significance of MBBs. Cervicogenic vertigo, medial branch block, facet joint, zygapophysial joint, neck pain, differential diagnosis.