Intra-articular Facet Joint Injections Research Articles

Reporting of Facet Joint Inflammation in Lumbar Spine MRI Studies in Patients With Low Back Pain.

Retrospective. We aimed to assess the frequency of facet joint inflammatory features noted in routine radiology reports of lumbar spine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies among patients with chronic low back pain. Facet joint arthropathy is one of the most common causes of chronic low back pain. It may encompass various inflammatory imaging characteristics, such as facet joint effusion, bone marrow edema, and soft tissue edema. The extent to which radiology reports mention inflammatory features of the lumbar facet joints and the accuracy of these reports have not been investigated. The authors performed a chart review on 49 subjects with previous facet-related interventions ( i.e . medial branch blocks or intra-articular facet joint injection) and MRI available in the medical record. One senior musculoskeletal radiologist and a musculoskeletal radiology fellow graded the inflammatory features using a published facet joint inflammation grading system [Gold Standard (GS)]. The authors identified the inflammatory markers mentioned in the radiology reports and calculated the sensitivity and positive predictive value of the radiology reports compared with GS readings. Compared with the GS, the sensitivity of radiology reports for facet joint effusion, bone marrow, and soft tissue edema ranged from 6% to 22%, and the positive predictive value ranged from 25% to 100%. L4/5 had the highest number of cases with inflammatory features noted on the reports. Inflammatory findings, such as facet joint effusion, bone marrow edema, and soft tissue edema, are not commonly identified in radiology reports. Further investigations are needed to determine the clinical importance of MRI-detected lumbar facet joint inflammatory features as a potential mechanism of nociception and as a predictor of outcomes following injections or other therapies.

Determining the Most Suitable Ultrasound-Guided Injection Technique in Treating Lumbar Facet Joint Syndrome.

(1) Background: Lower back pain is often caused by lumbar facet joint syndrome. This study investigated the effectiveness of three different injection methods under ultrasound guidance in treating elderly patients with lumbar facet joint syndrome. The difficulty in performing these injections was also evaluated; (2) Methods: A total of 60 elderly patients with facet joint syndrome as the cause of lower back pain were recruited and divided into 3 groups. Group 1 received medial branch block (MBB). Group 2 received intra-articular facet joint injections. Group 3 received injection into the multifidus muscle portion that covers the facet joint. Five percent dextrose water (D5W) was used as the injectant. The visual analog scale (VAS) was used to measure the degree of lower back pain; (3) Results: Before the injection treatments, the VAS score averaged about 7.5. After three consecutive injection treatments (two weeks interval), the VAS score decreased significantly to an average of about 1 in all 3 groups, representing mild to no pain. Between group analyses also did not reveal significant statistical differences, suggesting that these procedures are equally effective; (4) Conclusions: Ultrasound-guided injection of the multifidus muscle may be a feasible option in treating elderly patients with lower back pain caused by facet joint syndrome as it is easier to perform as compared to MBB and intra-articular facet joint injection.

Comparative Evaluation of Intraarticular Facet Joint Injection Versus Medial Branch Block in Patients With Low Back Pain: A Randomised Controlled Study.

Lumbar facet joint pain may refer to the back, buttocks, and proximal parts of the lower extremities. Intraarticular facet joint injections, facet joint nerve blocks, or facet joint neurolytic procedures are popular for the management of facet joint pain. In this prospective, randomised study, 60 patients with a medical evaluation and pain pattern consistent with lumbar facet joint pain were randomly allocated to two groups. Group Ⅰ (n=30) patients were administered fluoroscope-guided lumbar facet joint injection, and group Ⅱ (n=30) patients were administered fluoroscope-guided lumbar facet joint nerve block. The primary objective is to compare the efficacy of both in managing facet joint pain in terms of pain and disability improvement. Secondary objectives were to compare the requirement for repeat injections and parameters related to the block, such as ease of administering the block, and to note the side effects pertaining to either of the blocks. There was a statistically significant improvement in pain score after injection in both groups (p>0.05). The mean pain score in both groups remained less than two at all time intervals throughout the study period (p>0.05) Excellent patient satisfaction was reported by the majority of the patients at different time intervals in both groups. Both lumbar facet joint injection and lumbar facet joint nerve block are safe and effective techniques for managing lower back pain patients. Both techniques provide adequate pain relief and disability improvement.

Iatrogenic Vertebral Artery Dissection with Posterior Fossa and Lateral Medullary Stroke After Uncomplicated Cervical Nerve Ablation

BackgroundA cervical radiofrequency ablation is a procedure that can be performed to treat arthritis-related pain in the neck and upper back. There have been no large studies reporting complications after this procedure. We report a case of a 55-year-old woman with iatrogenic vertebral artery dissection of C3–C4 with segmental occlusion leading to a posterior fossa stroke and lateral medullary stroke after a high-grade cervical nerve ablation. Case ReportA 55-year-old woman presented to the Emergency Department with vomiting, neck pain, temperature changes, dizziness, and dysarthria after undergoing C2–C3, C4–C5 nerve ablation 30 min prior to arrival. The patient was found to have a vertebral artery dissection with posterior fossa and lateral medullary stroke. Why Should an Emergency Physician Be Aware of This?Vertebral artery dissection and subsequent stroke should be considered with recent cervical facet joint injections, such as intra-articular facet joint injections, medial branch blocks, or medial branch radiofrequency nerve ablation. The case we report shows devastating outcomes that can result from what many consider a relatively simple procedure.

Intra-Articular Facet Joint Injection of Normal Saline for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the patient-reported outcomes of intra-articular facet joint injections of normal saline and selected active substances to identify a more effective agent for treating subacute and chronic low back pain (LBP). Methods: The PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases were searched for randomized controlled trials and observational studies published in English. A research quality assessment was performed using ROB2 and ROBINS-I. A meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects model, and the mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) in efficacy outcomes, including pain, numbness, disability, and quality of life, were assessed. Results: Of the 2467 potential studies, 3 were included (247 patients). The active substances and normal saline had similar therapeutic effects on pain within 1 h, after 1-1.5 months, and after 3-6 months, with MD and 95% CI of 2.43 and -11.61 to 16.50, -0.63 and -7.97 to 6.72, and 1.90 and -16.03 to 19.83, respectively, as well as on the quality of life after 1 and 6 months. Conclusions: The short- and long-term clinical effects of intra-articular facet joint injections of normal saline are comparable to those of other active substances in patients with LBP.

Comparison of intra-articular lumbar facet joint injection of platelet-rich plasma and steroid in the treatment of chronic low back pain: A prospective study

Study design: Prospective randomized clinical study. Purpose: To compare the effectiveness and safety of intra-articular platelet-rich plasma (PCP) and steroid along with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in the treatment of chronic low back pain (LBP) due to facet joint arthropathy. Overview of literature: Facet joint pathology is an important cause of LBP—15–30% of all LBP cases. Lumbar intra-articular PRP is a relatively new method in the treatment of LBP. PRP stimulates the cells involved in regeneration. Hence, it seems a suitable option for the treatment of lumbar facet joint syndrome. Methods: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of facet joint injections in LBP secondary to facet joint arthropathy. Chronic LBP for ≥3 months (visual analogue scale (VAS) > 4), failed conservative treatment, no neurological deficit, unilateral facet joint pain, focal tenderness with hyperextension pain, and relief by diagnostic medial branch block were included. Patients were randomly allocated to Group S: Steroid (Triamcinolone) + RFA or Group P: PRP + RFA or Group R: 0.9% saline + RFA as control. Demographic, clinico-radiological, and outcome parameters were recorded till 6 months. Data were analyzed using SPSS and p < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: We studied 45 patients (n = 15 in each group) in the final analysis. Mean age was 45.7 ± 13.6 years and 60% were females in all groups. VAS decreased to 1.6 ± 0.8 (Group S) and 3.2 ± 0.8 (Group P) on day 1 ( p < 0.05). At 3 and 6 months, VAS reduced more in Group P (0.47 ± 0.5; 0.07 ± 0.2) versus Group S (2.53 ± 0.5; 3.07 ± 0.2) ( p < 0.001). Mean Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score at baseline was 72.8 ± 7.6 (all groups). At 1 month, Group S (17.2 ± 3.2) showed better improvement than Group P (23.2 ± 3.1) ( p < 0.05). At 6 months, Group P (8.9 ± 1.2) had more decrease in ODI than Group S (29.0 ± 2.1) ( p < 0.001). NSAIDs usage and Patient Satisfaction Score (PSS) were significantly better at 6 months in Group P than Group S ( p < 0.01; p < 0.05, respectively). Conclusion: Both PRP and corticosteroid injections were determined to be effective and safe for the treatment of lumbar facet joint syndrome after 6 months of follow-up. However, autologous PRP may be a superior treatment option for longer efficacy.

Interventional Minimally Invasive Treatments for Chronic Low Back Pain Caused by Lumbar Facet Joint Syndrome: A Systematic Review.

Systematic review. To investigate the efficacy of nonsurgical interventional treatments for chronic low back pain (LBP) caused by facet joint syndrome (FJS). A systematic review of the literature was conducted to identify studies that compared interventional treatments for LBP due to FJS among them, with usual care or sham procedures. Studies were evaluated for pain, physical function, disability, quality of life and employment status. The RoB-2 and MINORS tools were utilized to assess the risk of bias in included studies. Eighteen studies published between January 2000 and December 2021 were included (1496 patients, mean age: 54.31 years old). Intraarticular (IA) facet joint (FJ) injection of hyaluronic acid (HA) did not show significant difference compared to IA corticosteroids (CCS) in terms of pain and satisfaction. FJ denervation using radiofrequency (RF) displayed slightly superior or similar outcomes compared to IA CCS, physical therapy, or sham procedure. IA CCS showed better outcomes when combined with oral diclofenac compared to IA CCS or oral diclofenac alone but was not superior to IA local anesthetic and Sarapin. IA platelet-rich plasma (PRP) led to an improvement of pain, disability and satisfaction in the long term compared to IA CCS. FJS is a common cause of LBP that can be managed with several different strategies, including nonsurgical minimally invasive approaches such as IA HA, CCS, PRP and FJ denervation. However, available evidence showed mixed results, with overall little short-term or no benefits on pain, disability, and other investigated outcomes.

Ultrasound-guided lumbar medial branch blocks and intra-articular facet joint injections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

There is great interest in expanding the use of ultrasound (US), but new challenges exist with its application to lumbar facet-targeted procedures. The primary aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the risk of incorrect needle placement associated with US-guided lumbar medial branch blocks (MBB) and facet joint injections (FJI) as confirmed by fluoroscopy or computerized tomography (CT). An a priori protocol was registered, and a database search was conducted. Inclusion criteria included all study types. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized controlled trials and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood tool for assessing risk bias for observational cohort studies. Pooled analysis of the risk difference (RD) of incorrect needle placement was calculated. Pooled analysis of 7 studies demonstrated an 11% RD (P < 0.0009) of incorrect needle placement for US-guided MBB confirmed using fluoroscopy with and without contrast. Pooled analysis of 3 studies demonstrated a 13% RD (P < 0.0001) of incorrect needle placement for US-guided FJI confirmed using CT. The time to complete a single-level MBB ranged from 2.6 to 5.0 minutes. The certainty of evidence was low to very low. Ultrasound-guided lumbar MBB and FJI are associated with a significant risk of incorrect needle placement when confirmed by fluoroscopy or CT. The technical limitations of US and individual patient factors could contribute to the risk of incorrect needle placement.

The Effectiveness of Facet Joint Local Corticosteroid Injection in Diagnosis and Treatment of Facet Joint Syndrome

Objectives: To evaluate outcomes of lumbar facet joint injection with local corticosteroid in treatmentof chronic low back pain according to Oswestry disability Index(ODI).Patients and Methods: Interventional prospective study on 23 patients attended the outpatient clinic ofOrthopedic Surgery in Cairo University Hospitalscomplaining of chronic low back pain not responsiveto medical treatment and physiotherapy from September 2018 to august 2019.Results: The mean age of the patients was 41.17 ± 9.74 years and 47.8% were males. Facet jointcorticosteroid injection resulted in significant reduction of pain severity of patients as it ranged 5:10(mean 7.3 ±1.5) pre-injection and improved to 0 :6 (mean 3.6 ± 1.7) 3-month post injection(Pvalue:0.001)while the ODI score ranged 26:80 (mean 47.4 ±15.7) pre-injection and improved to 4:46 (mean 28.8 ±10.4) three months post injection(Pvalue 0.001).Conclusion: intra-articular facet joint injection is crucial in the diagnosis and treatment of facet jointsyndrome.

A Case of Migraine Headaches with Hemifacial Spasm: Complete Resolution of Hemifacial Spasm Following Upper Cervical Intraarticular Facet Joint Injection

Background: Headache is one of the leading neurological disorders both globally and nationally, responsible for significant morbidity and disability. Migraine headache disorder is a common headache disorder affecting at least 11% of world’s population. Case Report: We present a case of a patient who presented with migraine headaches associated with hemifacial spasm (only during acute migraine attacks) along with upper cervical pain. She was offered right-sided C2-C3 and C3-C4 intraarticular facet joint injections with steroid and local anesthetic under fluoroscopy. Significant relief in headaches along with a complete resolution of hemifacial spasms was noted. Conclusion: This outcome raises the possibility of underlying pathophysiological processes that could have been interrupted by cervical facet joint steroid injection to stop the facial spasms. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first case report of migraine headaches associated with hemifacial spasm that responded to cervical intraarticular facet joint injection. Key words: Facet joint injection, headache, hemifacial spasm, medial branch block, migraine, pathophysiology, spinal cord stimulation, trigeminocervical complex

Steroid Distancing in Interventional Pain Management During COVID-19 and Beyond: Safe, Effective and Practical Approach

Background: Since the late 1940s, corticosteroids have been a mainstay class of agents in multiple interventional techniques and intra-articular injections. Exogenous glucocorticoids are structurally and pharmacologically similar to the endogenous hormones. As such, multiple actions of corticosteroids are exhibited, including those of anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive effects. Epidural injections, with or without steroids, have been extensively used throughout the world. There are reports of epidural injections starting in 1901, with steroids being added to the local anesthetic since 1952, when steroids were administered into the sacral foramen. Purpose: Due to the extensive side effects of steroids in various injections, some have proposed limiting their use in epidurals and intraarticular injections. With the COVID-19 pandemic, the multiple side effects of the steroids have elevated the level of concern and recommendations have been made to utilize local anesthetic alone or the lowest dose of steroids. Fashioned from common expressions of the day, the term “steroid distancing” began to be used and proposed for intraarticular injections of the knee. Consequently, we sought to evaluate the evidence and feasibility of steroid distancing in interventional pain management. Methods: This focused review of local anesthetics and steroids utilized in interventional pain management for epidural injections, peripheral nerve blocks, and intraarticular injections by multiple database searches. This is a focused narrative review and not a systematic review. Consequently, evidence synthesis was not performed traditionally, but was based on an overview of the available evidence. Results: No significant difference was identified based on whether steroids are added to local anesthetic or not for epidural as well as facet joint injections. However, there was not enough evidence to compare these 2 groups for peripheral intraarticular injections. Limitations: The present review is limited by the paucity of literature with bupivacaine alone or bupivacaine with steroids local anesthetic alone or with steroids of intraarticular injections of knee, hip, shoulder and other joints, and intraarticular facet joint injections. Conclusion: This review shows an overall lack of significant difference between lidocaine alone and lidocaine with steroids in epidural injections. However, available evidence is limited for bupivacaine alone or with steroids. Evidence is also not available comparing local anesthetic alone with steroids for facet joint or peripheral joint intraarticular injections. Thus, it is concluded that local anesthetic with lidocaine may be utilized for epidural injections, with appropriate patient selection and steroids reserved for non-responsive patients with local anesthetic and with significant radiculitis. Key words: Steroid distancing, chronic pain, steroids, epidural injections, local anesthetic alone, local anesthetic with steroid, steroid distancing, physical distancing

Therapeutic Facet Joint Interventions in the Lumbar Spine: An Economic Value Perspective.

In this narrative review, the current literature on therapeutic interventions for low back pain of facet joint etiology is assessed from an economic value perspective. The efficacy and economics of facet joint interventions in the treatment of lumbar back pain is a controversial topic. Trends show that facet joint interventions are becoming increasingly used, perhaps as physicians become more averse to treating chronic low back pain with opioids. With the emphasis on value-based spine care and changing reimbursement models, the perspective of rigorously evaluating the outcomes these interventions provide and the costs they incur is particularly relevant. Although the evidence is noted to be limited, most systematic reviews fail to demonstrate the therapeutic utility of intra-articular facet joint injections in low back pain because of high study heterogeneity. A few good quality studies and systematic reviews describe moderate evidence for the utilization of therapeutic medial branch blocks and radiofrequency neurotomies in alleviating facet joint pain. Consequently, there is a need for high-quality cost-effectiveness studies for facet joint interventions so that evidence-based and economically viable solutions can be used to optimize patient care at a societally affordable price.

Effectiveness of Ultrasonography and Fluoroscopy as a Therapeutic Imaging Modality in the Management of Lumbar Facet Arthropathy: A Prospective Interventional Study

Introduction: Lumbar zygopophyseal joint arthropathy is one of the most common causes of low back pain in adults. Historically, C-arm/Fluoroscopy has served as an image guidance tool in intra-articular facet joint injections, however, now ultrasound guidance is also a viable option. Aim: To compare ultrasonography (USG) and fluoroscopy as therapeutic imaging modalities on the basis of time taken for intervention, Visual Analogue Score (VAS) for pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) at 2, 4 and 12 weeks. Materials and Methods: It was a prospective interventional study done with 62 patients who satisfied the inclusion and exclusion criteria and randomly allocated into two groups. Groups were compared on the basis of time taken for intervention, VAS for pain and ODI at 2, 4 and 12 weeks. Independent sample student t-test/Mann-Whitney U test was applied. Confidence Interval (CI) was taken as 95% and p-value &lt;0.05 was considered as statistically significant. Results: Ultrasound group had mean age of 37.75 years (range, 23-55 years) while that of Fluoroscopy group was 40.05 years (range, 20-54 years). Ultrasonography group was quicker by about 135 seconds (2 minutes and 15 seconds) which was statistically significant but there was statistically no difference between the two groups in terms of VAS and ODI at 2 weeks (p=0.107 and 0.893, respectively), 4 weeks (p=0.383 and 0.408, respectively) and 12 weeks (p=0.343 and 0.777, respectively) at 95% CI. Conclusion: Both groups showed significant improvement in pain and disability after 2, 4 and 12 weeks however there were no significant differences in pain and functional improvement between USG guided transverse view and fluoroscopy guided intra-articular lumbar facet joint injection. Therefore, USG guided transverse approach is quicker, feasible and minimises exposure of radiation to patient as well as interventionist

Lumbar Facet Joint Radiofrequency Ablation Versus Intra-articular Lumbar Facet Joint Injections Using Corticosteroids in the Reduction of Chronic Low Back Pain Related to the Facet Joints

Purpose: The purpose of this article is to review nonoperative treatment for chronic low back pain (CLBP) related to facet joint dysfunction and to compare the long-term pain reduction and functional improvement with lumbar facet joint (LFJ) radiofrequency (RF) ablation vs. intra-articular (IA) LFJ injections using corticosteroids. Method: A systematic search of databases included PubMed and Google Scholar. Search terms included low back pain, facet joint dysfunction, injection, corticosteroid, and RF. The search resulted in several hundred results. An advanced MeSH term search was then used to limit the effect to within the past 10 years with variations of the terms mentioned above to further narrow the results to address the clinical question which resulted in 94 citations. Results: There were satisfactory results using PubMed Advanced Search Builder to include several comparative systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials. Excluded were studies that were broad in their comparisons, including those which included treatments with physical activity modifications, oral medications, physiotherapy, and chiropractic manipulation. Conclusion: Studies suggest that there is a moderate amount of improvement in the short-term (less than 6 months) for both IA LFJ injections using corticosteroids and LFJ RF ablation; however, the RF ablation had better results for the middle (6 to 12 months) to long-term (greater than 12 months). The results established by the author's review suggest that although LFJ RF ablation and IA LFJ injections using corticosteroids are equally effective in the short-term pain management of patients with CLBP, RF is the more effective treatment for long-term pain management in patients with CLBP related to facet joint dysfunction.

Intra-articular facet joint steroid injection-related adverse events encountered during 11,980 procedures.

To analyze the incidence and characteristics of intra-articular facet joint injection (FJI)-related adverse events requiring hospitalization and emergency room visits. From January 2007 to December 2017, a total of 11,980 FJI procedures in 6066 patients (mean age 66.8 years, range 15-97 years, M:F = 2004:4062) were performed in our department. Of these, we retrospectively reviewed 489 cases in 432 patients who were hospitalized or visited the emergency room within a month of FJI. FJI-related adverse events were classified as procedure-related complications, drug-related systemic events, or uncertain etiology events, on the basis of consensus of two spine radiologists. This is a descriptive study without statistical analysis. There were 101 FJI-related adverse event cases in 99 patients (mean age 71.8 years, range 39-97 years, M:F = 39:60). The overall incidence of FJI-related adverse events was 0.84% (101/11,980) per case and 1.63% (99/6066) per patient. The incidence of procedure-related complications and drug-related systemic adverse events was 0.07% (8/11,980) and 0.15% (18/11,980), respectively; the rate of uncertain etiology events was 0.63% (75/11,980). All eight procedure-related complication cases involved major complications. There are seven cases of infectious spondylitis and one was progression of systemic aspergillosis to the spine. One patient died of an uncontrolled infection with infective endocarditis, and two patients experienced partial recovery with neurological sequelae. The overall incidence of FJI-related adverse events is low, and procedure-related major complications are rare without dural puncture or epidural hematoma. Nevertheless, infection can occur, resulting in serious outcomes. • The incidence of FJI-related adverse events requiring hospitalization or ER visit was 0.84%. • The incidence of major procedure-related complications was 0.07%. • All major complications were associated with infection and there were no cases of epidural hematoma.

Injection in Facet Joint Arthropathy

Background: Facet syndrome is an articular disorder related to the lumbar facet joints and their innervations, and produces both local and radiating pain. Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcome of steroid injection in treatment of facet joint arthropathy. Patient and Methods: This study was held on 23 patients suffered from chronic low back pain due to facet arthropathy at Al-Azhar University and Alharam Specialized Hospitals. There were 11 males and 12 females with mean age 46.27 years (28 to 60 years). History, clinical examination, x-ray, MRIs were done to all patients. Results: Pain was evaluated by VAS. The mean VAS pre injection was 8.1 ± 0.83 ranging from 6:10. Immediately post injection, the mean was decreased to 3.7 ± 0.85 ranging from 2:5. Six weeks after injection the mean was decreased to 3.6 ± 0.98 ranging from 2:5. Twelve weeks after injection the mean was elevated to 5.3 ± 0.91 ranging from 4 to 6. The mean ODI improved from 36.5 ± 6.9 to 21.1 ± 4.2 three months post injection. Conclusion: intra-articular facet joint injection is crucial in the diagnosis and treatment of facet joint syndrome. It is an easy to perform and effective treatment for temporary pain relief. The pain relief is sustained longer in patients with grade G2 and G3 of facet joints

Corticosteroid and Cortisol Serum Levels Following Intra‐articular Triamcinolone Acetonide Lumbar Facet Joint Injections

Facet joint steroid injections are used to treat chronic low back pain. However, little is known about the systemic absorption and serum levels of steroids following intra-articular facet joint injections. The primary objective of this preliminary study was to investigate the pharmacokinetics of triamcinolone acetonide following fluoroscopically guided intra-articular lumbar facet joint injections in a cohort of patients with chronic low back pain. A secondary aim was to investigate the effects of triamcinolone on serum cortisol levels following lumbar facet joint injections. The study cohort included 5 patients undergoing fluoroscopically guided intra-articular lumbar facet joint injections at a pain medicine specialty clinic. Blood was collected prior to the injections and on days 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 14, 21, 28, 35, and 42 following the injections. The terminal elimination half-life of triamcinolone in a noncompartmental analysis was 213 hours. The peak median triamcinolone concentration of 3.6 ng/mL was detected within 24 hours after the injections. Serum cortisol levels were < 30 ng/mL for an average of 4.4 days. The maximum effect of triamcinolone on cortisol suppression was observed with triamcinolone serum levels of > 1.9 ng/mL. The peak serum concentration of triamcinolone following intra-articular facet joint injections occurred within 24 hours. The median terminal elimination half-life was 213 hours, but baseline cortisol levels were suppressed for an average of 4.4 days. Clinically, the prolonged half-life and endocrine effects of triamcinolone could increase the risk for serious drug-drug interactions in patients taking medications that inhibit corticosteroid metabolism.

Facet joint injections for people with persistent non-specific low back pain (Facet Injection Study): a feasibility study for a randomised controlled trial.

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) 2009 guidelines for persistent low back pain (LBP) do not recommend the injection of therapeutic substances into the back as a treatment for LBP because of the absence of evidence for their effectiveness. This feasibility study aimed to provide a stable platform that could be used to evaluate a randomised controlled trial (RCT) on the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of intra-articular facet joint injections (FJIs) when added to normal care. To explore the feasibility of running a RCT to test the hypothesis that, for people with suspected facet joint back pain, adding the option of intra-articular FJIs (local anaesthetic and corticosteroids) to best usual non-invasive care is clinically effective and cost-effective. The trial was a mixed design. The RCT pilot protocol development involved literature reviews and a consensus conference followed by a randomised pilot study with an embedded mixed-methods process evaluation. Five NHS acute trusts in England. Participants were patients aged ≥ 18 years with moderately troublesome LBP present (> 6 months), who had failed previous conservative treatment and who had suspected facet joint pain. The study aimed to recruit 150 participants (approximately 30 per site). Participants were randomised sequentially by a remote service to FJIs combined with 'best usual care' (BUC) or BUC alone. All participants were to receive six sessions of a bespoke BUC rehabilitation package. Those randomised into the intervention arm were, in addition, given FJIs with local anaesthetic and steroids (at up to six injection sites). Randomisation occurred at the end of the first BUC session. Process and clinical outcomes. Clinical outcomes included a measurement of level of pain on a scale from 0 to 10, which was collected daily and then weekly via text messaging (or through a written diary). Questionnaire follow-up was at 3 months. Fifty-two stakeholders attended the consensus meeting. Agreement informed several statistical questions and three design considerations: diagnosis, the process of FJI and the BUC package and informing the design for the randomised pilot study. Recruitment started on 26 June 2015 and was terminated by the funder (as a result of poor recruitment) on 11 December 2015. In total, 26 participants were randomised. Process data illuminate some of the reasons for recruitment problems but also show that trial processes after enrolment ran smoothly. No between-group analysis was carried out. All pain-related outcomes show the expected improvement between baseline and follow-up. The mean total cost of the overall treatment package (injection £419.22 and BUC £264.00) was estimated at £683.22 per participant. This is similar to a NHS tariff cost for a course of FJIs of £686.84. Poor recruitment was a limiting factor. This feasibility study achieved consensus on the main challenges in a trial of FJIs for people with persistent non-specific low back pain. Further work is needed to test recruitment from alternative clinical situations. EudraCT 2014-000682-50 and Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN93184143. This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 30. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Intra-articular facet joint injections for low back pain: a systematic review.

Evidence supporting the use of therapeutic intra-articular facet joint injections for patients with suspected facet joint pain is sparse. A systematic review including a narrative synthesis was carried out to determine if intra-articular facet joint injections with active drug are more effective in reducing back pain and back pain-related disability than a sham procedure or a placebo/inactive injection. Secondly, to determine if intra-articular facet joint injections with active drug or placebo/inactive injection are more effective in reducing back pain and back pain-related disability than conservative treatment. Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, Index to Chiropractic Literature and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception through April 2015. Data were screened and single extraction with independent verification and risk of bias assessment was performed. A total of 391 records were screened, and six trials were included. The trials included were small (range 18-109 participants) and overall in terms of pain and disability outcomes most were inconclusive. Only two of the trials report any significant between-group differences in pain (mean difference -1.0, 95% CI -2.0 to -0.1) and (p = 0.032) or disability (mean difference -3.0, 95% CI -6.2 to 0.2) and (p = 0.013) outcomes. The studies found here were clinically diverse and precluded any meta-analysis. A number of methodological issues were identified. The positive results, whilst interpreted with caution, do suggest that there is a need for further high-quality work in this area.

Does therapist's attitude affect clinical outcome of lumbar facet joint injections?

To investigate if the clinical outcome of intra-articular lumbar facet joint injections is affected by the therapist's attitude. A total of 40 patients with facet joint-associated chronic low back pain were randomly divided into two groups. All patients received computed tomography-guided, monosegmental intra-articular facet joint injections. Following the therapeutic procedure, the patients of the experimental group (EG) held a conversation with the radiologist in a comfortable atmosphere. During the dialog, the patients were encouraged to ask questions and were shown four images. The patients of the control group (CG) left the clinic without any further contact with the radiologist. Outcome was assessed using a pain-based Verbal Numeric Scale at baseline, at 1 wk and at 1, 3, and 6 mo after first treatment. The patient demographics showed no differences between the groups. The patients of the EG received 57 interventional procedures in total, while the patients of the CG received 70 interventional procedures. In both groups, the pain scores decreased significantly over the entire observation period. Compared to the CG, the EG showed a statistically significant reduction of pain at 1 wk and 1 mo post-treatment, while at 3 and 6 mo after treatment, there were no significant differences between both groups. Our results show a significant effect on pain relief during the early post-interventional period in the EG as compared to the CG. The basic principle behind the higher efficacy might be the phenomenon of hetero-suggestion.