面关节神经阻滞治疗面关节源性慢性轴性脊柱疼痛的效果:系统回顾与元分析》。

IF 2.6 2区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY Pain physician Pub Date : 2024-02-01
Laxmaiah Manchikanti, Emilija Knezevic, Nebojsa Nick Knezevic, Mahendra R Sanapati, Alan D Kaye, Salahadin Abdi, Amol Soin, Joshua A Hirsch
{"title":"面关节神经阻滞治疗面关节源性慢性轴性脊柱疼痛的效果:系统回顾与元分析》。","authors":"Laxmaiah Manchikanti, Emilija Knezevic, Nebojsa Nick Knezevic, Mahendra R Sanapati, Alan D Kaye, Salahadin Abdi, Amol Soin, Joshua A Hirsch","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Chronic axial spinal pain is one of the major causes of disability. Literature shows that spending on low back and neck pain and musculoskeletal disorders continues to escalate, not only with disability, but also with increasing costs, accounting for the highest amount of various disease categories. Based on the current literature utilizing controlled diagnostic blocks, facet joints, nerve root dura, and sacroiliac joints have been shown as potential sources of spinal pain. Therapeutic facet joint interventional modalities of axial spinal pain include radiofrequency neurotomy, therapeutic facet joint nerve blocks, and therapeutic intraarticular injections.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the effectiveness of facet joint nerve blocks as a therapeutic modality in managing chronic axial spinal pain of facet joint origin.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies utilizing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The available literature on facet joint nerve blocks in axial spinal pain was reviewed. The quality assessment criteria utilized were the Cochrane review criteria to assess risk of bias, the Interventional Pain Management Techniques - Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment (IPM-QRB) for randomized therapeutic trials, and the Interventional Pain Management Techniques - Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment for Nonrandomized Studies (IPM-QRBNR) for nonrandomized studies. The evidence was graded according to Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) assessment criteria. The level of evidence was based on best evidence synthesis with modified grading of qualitative evidence from Level I to Level V. A comprehensive literature search of multiple databases from 1966 to July 2023, including manual searches of the bibliography of known review articles was performed. Quality assessment of the included studies and best evidence synthesis were incorporated into qualitative and quantitative evidence synthesis.</p><p><strong>Outcome measures: </strong>The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients with significant relief and functional improvement of greater than 50% of at least 3 months. Duration of relief was categorized as short-term (less than 6 months) and long-term (greater than 6 months).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This assessment identified 8 high-quality and one moderate quality RCTs and 8 high quality and 4 moderate quality non-randomized studies with application of spinal facet joint nerve blocks as therapeutic modalities. However, based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) assessment, only 3 of the 21 studies showed high levels of evidence and clinical applicability, with 11 studies showing moderate levels of GRADE evidence and clinical applicability.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Despite the availability of multiple studies, the paucity of literature is considered as the major drawback. Based on Grading of Recommendations, Assessment Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) assessment, only 3 of the 21 studies showed high levels of evidence and clinical applicability.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Based on the present systematic review and meta-analysis with 9 RCTs and 12 non-randomized studies, the evidence is Level II with moderate to strong recommendation for therapeutic facet joint nerve blocks in managing spinal facet joint pain.</p>","PeriodicalId":19841,"journal":{"name":"Pain physician","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effectiveness of Facet Joint Nerve Blocks in Managing Chronic Axial Spinal Pain of Facet Joint Origin: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Laxmaiah Manchikanti, Emilija Knezevic, Nebojsa Nick Knezevic, Mahendra R Sanapati, Alan D Kaye, Salahadin Abdi, Amol Soin, Joshua A Hirsch\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Chronic axial spinal pain is one of the major causes of disability. Literature shows that spending on low back and neck pain and musculoskeletal disorders continues to escalate, not only with disability, but also with increasing costs, accounting for the highest amount of various disease categories. Based on the current literature utilizing controlled diagnostic blocks, facet joints, nerve root dura, and sacroiliac joints have been shown as potential sources of spinal pain. Therapeutic facet joint interventional modalities of axial spinal pain include radiofrequency neurotomy, therapeutic facet joint nerve blocks, and therapeutic intraarticular injections.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the effectiveness of facet joint nerve blocks as a therapeutic modality in managing chronic axial spinal pain of facet joint origin.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies utilizing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The available literature on facet joint nerve blocks in axial spinal pain was reviewed. The quality assessment criteria utilized were the Cochrane review criteria to assess risk of bias, the Interventional Pain Management Techniques - Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment (IPM-QRB) for randomized therapeutic trials, and the Interventional Pain Management Techniques - Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment for Nonrandomized Studies (IPM-QRBNR) for nonrandomized studies. The evidence was graded according to Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) assessment criteria. The level of evidence was based on best evidence synthesis with modified grading of qualitative evidence from Level I to Level V. A comprehensive literature search of multiple databases from 1966 to July 2023, including manual searches of the bibliography of known review articles was performed. Quality assessment of the included studies and best evidence synthesis were incorporated into qualitative and quantitative evidence synthesis.</p><p><strong>Outcome measures: </strong>The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients with significant relief and functional improvement of greater than 50% of at least 3 months. Duration of relief was categorized as short-term (less than 6 months) and long-term (greater than 6 months).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This assessment identified 8 high-quality and one moderate quality RCTs and 8 high quality and 4 moderate quality non-randomized studies with application of spinal facet joint nerve blocks as therapeutic modalities. However, based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) assessment, only 3 of the 21 studies showed high levels of evidence and clinical applicability, with 11 studies showing moderate levels of GRADE evidence and clinical applicability.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Despite the availability of multiple studies, the paucity of literature is considered as the major drawback. Based on Grading of Recommendations, Assessment Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) assessment, only 3 of the 21 studies showed high levels of evidence and clinical applicability.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Based on the present systematic review and meta-analysis with 9 RCTs and 12 non-randomized studies, the evidence is Level II with moderate to strong recommendation for therapeutic facet joint nerve blocks in managing spinal facet joint pain.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19841,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pain physician\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pain physician\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain physician","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:慢性脊柱轴性疼痛是导致残疾的主要原因之一。文献显示,腰背痛、颈椎痛和肌肉骨骼疾病的花费持续攀升,不仅致残率高,费用也在不断增加,在各类疾病中占比最高。根据目前利用对照诊断阻滞的文献资料,面关节、神经根硬膜和骶髂关节已被证明是脊柱疼痛的潜在来源。治疗脊柱轴性疼痛的面关节介入方法包括射频神经切断术、治疗性面关节神经阻滞术和治疗性关节内注射:本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在评估面关节神经阻滞作为一种治疗方法在治疗面关节源性慢性脊柱轴向疼痛方面的有效性:研究设计:对随机对照试验(RCT)和观察性研究进行系统综述和荟萃分析,采用系统综述和荟萃分析首选报告项目(PRISMA)清单:方法:对现有的有关面神经阻滞治疗轴性脊柱疼痛的文献进行了回顾。采用的质量评估标准包括用于评估偏倚风险的 Cochrane 综述标准、用于随机治疗试验的 "介入性疼痛管理技术--可靠性和偏倚风险评估质量评估"(IPM-QRB)以及用于非随机研究的 "介入性疼痛管理技术--可靠性和偏倚风险评估质量评估"(IPM-QRBNR)。证据按照《建议、评估、发展与评价分级》(GRADE)评估标准进行分级。对 1966 年至 2023 年 7 月期间的多个数据库进行了全面的文献检索,包括人工检索已知综述文章的书目。对纳入研究的质量评估和最佳证据综合纳入了定性和定量证据综合:主要结果指标是至少 3 个月内病情明显缓解且功能改善超过 50%的患者比例。缓解持续时间分为短期(少于 6 个月)和长期(超过 6 个月):结果:此次评估确定了 8 项高质量和 1 项中等质量的 RCT 研究,以及 8 项高质量和 4 项中等质量的非随机研究,这些研究都将脊柱面关节神经阻滞作为一种治疗方式。然而,根据建议、评估、发展和评价分级(GRADE)评估,21 项研究中只有 3 项研究显示了高水平的证据和临床适用性,11 项研究显示了中等水平的 GRADE 证据和临床适用性:局限性:尽管文献数量少被认为是主要缺点。根据推荐、评估发展和评价分级(GRADE)评估,21 项研究中仅有 3 项显示出较高的证据水平和临床适用性:根据本系统综述和荟萃分析(包括 9 项研究性临床试验和 12 项非随机研究),治疗性面关节神经阻滞治疗脊柱面关节疼痛的证据等级为二级,推荐程度为中到强。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Effectiveness of Facet Joint Nerve Blocks in Managing Chronic Axial Spinal Pain of Facet Joint Origin: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: Chronic axial spinal pain is one of the major causes of disability. Literature shows that spending on low back and neck pain and musculoskeletal disorders continues to escalate, not only with disability, but also with increasing costs, accounting for the highest amount of various disease categories. Based on the current literature utilizing controlled diagnostic blocks, facet joints, nerve root dura, and sacroiliac joints have been shown as potential sources of spinal pain. Therapeutic facet joint interventional modalities of axial spinal pain include radiofrequency neurotomy, therapeutic facet joint nerve blocks, and therapeutic intraarticular injections.

Objective: The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the effectiveness of facet joint nerve blocks as a therapeutic modality in managing chronic axial spinal pain of facet joint origin.

Study design: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies utilizing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist.

Methods: The available literature on facet joint nerve blocks in axial spinal pain was reviewed. The quality assessment criteria utilized were the Cochrane review criteria to assess risk of bias, the Interventional Pain Management Techniques - Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment (IPM-QRB) for randomized therapeutic trials, and the Interventional Pain Management Techniques - Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment for Nonrandomized Studies (IPM-QRBNR) for nonrandomized studies. The evidence was graded according to Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) assessment criteria. The level of evidence was based on best evidence synthesis with modified grading of qualitative evidence from Level I to Level V. A comprehensive literature search of multiple databases from 1966 to July 2023, including manual searches of the bibliography of known review articles was performed. Quality assessment of the included studies and best evidence synthesis were incorporated into qualitative and quantitative evidence synthesis.

Outcome measures: The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients with significant relief and functional improvement of greater than 50% of at least 3 months. Duration of relief was categorized as short-term (less than 6 months) and long-term (greater than 6 months).

Results: This assessment identified 8 high-quality and one moderate quality RCTs and 8 high quality and 4 moderate quality non-randomized studies with application of spinal facet joint nerve blocks as therapeutic modalities. However, based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) assessment, only 3 of the 21 studies showed high levels of evidence and clinical applicability, with 11 studies showing moderate levels of GRADE evidence and clinical applicability.

Limitations: Despite the availability of multiple studies, the paucity of literature is considered as the major drawback. Based on Grading of Recommendations, Assessment Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) assessment, only 3 of the 21 studies showed high levels of evidence and clinical applicability.

Conclusion: Based on the present systematic review and meta-analysis with 9 RCTs and 12 non-randomized studies, the evidence is Level II with moderate to strong recommendation for therapeutic facet joint nerve blocks in managing spinal facet joint pain.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Pain physician
Pain physician CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
21.60%
发文量
234
期刊介绍: Pain Physician Journal is the official publication of the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP). The open access journal is published 6 times a year. Pain Physician Journal is a peer-reviewed, multi-disciplinary, open access journal written by and directed to an audience of interventional pain physicians, clinicians and basic scientists with an interest in interventional pain management and pain medicine. Pain Physician Journal presents the latest studies, research, and information vital to those in the emerging specialty of interventional pain management – and critical to the people they serve.
期刊最新文献
Delineating the Hurtful, Engaging, Emotive, and Directive (HEED) Dimensions of Pain. Characterization for Clinical Relevance. Effectiveness Analysis of Awake Computed Tomography-Guided Double-Needle Percutaneous Radiofrequency Thermocoagulation for the Treatment of Glossopharyngeal Neuralgia. Efficacy Analysis of Temporary Spinal Cord Stimulation in the Treatment of Refractory Postherpetic Neuralgia. Erector Spinae Plane Block Provided Comparable Analgesia as Thoracic Paravertebral Block Post Pediatric Nuss Procedure for Pectus Excavatum: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Extended vs. Traditional Operating Table in C-Arm-Guided Percutaneous Balloon Compression of the Gasserian Ganglion for Trigeminal Neuralgia: A Prospective Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1