Abstract:Employing more stringent selection criteria for lumbar facet RF is likely to result in withholding a beneficial procedure from a substantial number of patients, without improving success rates.
“…Cohen et al examined the relationship between the response to lumbar facet blocks and the subsequent response to RF ablation of the nerves innervating lumbar facet joints. 17 In this prospective study, no cutoff reliably identified a patient population that responded better to lumbar facet RF ablation. In addition, there was very little correlation between the response to lumbar facet blocks and the eventual response to treatment, a finding that mirrors those of our study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…To qualify for the study, the pre-block NRS rating had to be at least 5 and at least one post-block score had to show a ≥50% reduction compared to pre-block. The average response to SIJB was calculated as (NRS preblock -average(NRS 30/60 ))/NRS preblock × 100%, as previously described by Cohen et al 17 A small number of patients who did not provide both 30 and 60 minute scores were eliminated from this analysis.…”
Section: Sij Blockmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For instance, In patients with lumbar facet joint pain diagnosed by facet block, there was little correlation between pain relief during a medial branch block and subsequent response RF-based denervation of the facet. 17 In this report, we used a similar analytic approach to examine the correlation between the immediate response to SIJB and the 6-and 12-month pain and disability scores of patients undergoing SIJF in two prospective multicenter clinical trials.…”
BackgroundThe degree of pain relief required to diagnose sacroiliac joint (SIJ) dysfunction following a diagnostic SIJ block (SI-JB) is not known. No gold standard exists. Response to definitive (i.e., accepted as effective) treatment might be a reference standard.
“…Cohen et al examined the relationship between the response to lumbar facet blocks and the subsequent response to RF ablation of the nerves innervating lumbar facet joints. 17 In this prospective study, no cutoff reliably identified a patient population that responded better to lumbar facet RF ablation. In addition, there was very little correlation between the response to lumbar facet blocks and the eventual response to treatment, a finding that mirrors those of our study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…To qualify for the study, the pre-block NRS rating had to be at least 5 and at least one post-block score had to show a ≥50% reduction compared to pre-block. The average response to SIJB was calculated as (NRS preblock -average(NRS 30/60 ))/NRS preblock × 100%, as previously described by Cohen et al 17 A small number of patients who did not provide both 30 and 60 minute scores were eliminated from this analysis.…”
Section: Sij Blockmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For instance, In patients with lumbar facet joint pain diagnosed by facet block, there was little correlation between pain relief during a medial branch block and subsequent response RF-based denervation of the facet. 17 In this report, we used a similar analytic approach to examine the correlation between the immediate response to SIJB and the 6-and 12-month pain and disability scores of patients undergoing SIJF in two prospective multicenter clinical trials.…”
BackgroundThe degree of pain relief required to diagnose sacroiliac joint (SIJ) dysfunction following a diagnostic SIJ block (SI-JB) is not known. No gold standard exists. Response to definitive (i.e., accepted as effective) treatment might be a reference standard.
“…11 Some authors have also advocated higher analgesic cutoff values as the reference standard for designating a block as positive, 6 although a prospective study found no differences in RF denervation treatment outcomes when diagnostic blocks were stratified by percent pain relief. 48 On a similar note, RF denervation may not have been optimal in all cases. For example, a recent study showed that injecting corticosteroids before RF denervation decreases lesion size and that increasing the size of the cannulae, the time of lesioning, and the temperature will amplify lesion area.…”
When used as a prognostic tool before lumbar facet radiofrequency, MBB may be associated with a higher success rate than IA injections. Our results should be confirmed by large, prospective, randomized studies.
“…In attempt to improve outcomes, studies have been performed focusing on patients' selection based on their response to controlled diagnostic blocks to confirm the facetogenic etiology of their chronic low back pain, and ideal electrodes placement to optimize ablation of the culprit nerves . To establish the threshold cutoff for the diagnostic blocks, a multicenter prospective study was designed ( n = 61), which demonstrated there were no significant differences in the procedure outcomes with over 50% pain relief after the diagnostic blocks.…”
There seems to be significant functional improvement associated with temp of 90°C compared to 80°C, with no added risk of complications. Randomized controlled studies are warranted.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.