Consensus practice guidelines on interventions for cervical spine (facet) joint pain from a multispecialty international working group.

BACKGROUND: The past two decades have witnessed a surge in the use of cervical spine joint procedures including joint injections, nerve blocks and radiofrequency ablation to treat chronic neck pain, yet many aspects of the procedures remain controversial. METHODS: In August 2020, the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine and the American Academy of Pain Medicine approved and charged the Cervical Joint Working Group to develop neck pain guidelines. Eighteen stakeholder societies were identified, and formal request-for-participation and member nomination letters were sent to those organizations. Participating entities selected panel members and an ad hoc steering committee selected preliminary questions, which were then revised by the full committee. Each question was assigned to a module composed of 4-5 members, who worked with the Subcommittee Lead and the Committee Chairs on preliminary versions, which were sent to the full committee after revisions. We used a modified Delphi method whereby the questions were sent to the committee en bloc and comments were returned in a non-blinded fashion to the Chairs, who incorporated the comments and sent out revised versions until consensus was reached. Before commencing, it was agreed that a recommendation would be noted with >50% agreement among committee members, but a consensus recommendation would require ≥75% agreement. RESULTS: Twenty questions were selected, with 100% consensus achieved in committee on 17 topics. Among participating organizations, 14 of 15 that voted approved or supported the guidelines en bloc, with 14 questions being approved with no dissensions or abstentions. Specific questions addressed included the value of clinical presentation and imaging in selecting patients for procedures, whether conservative treatment should be used before injections, whether imaging is necessary for blocks, diagnostic and prognostic value of medial branch blocks and intra-articular joint injections, the effects of sedation and injectate volume on validity, whether facet blocks have therapeutic value, what the ideal cut-off value is for designating a block as positive, how many blocks should be performed before radiofrequency ablation, the orientation of electrodes, whether larger lesions translate into higher success rates, whether stimulation should be used before radiofrequency ablation, how best to mitigate complication risks, if different standards should be applied to clinical practice and trials, and the indications for repeating radiofrequency ablation. CONCLUSIONS: Cervical medial branch radiofrequency ablation may provide benefit to well-selected individuals, with medial branch blocks being more predictive than intra-articular injections. More stringent selection criteria are likely to improve denervation outcomes, but at the expense of false-negatives (ie, lower overall success rate). Clinical trials should be tailored based on objectives, and selection criteria for some may be more stringent than what is ideal in clinical practice.

Consensus practice guidelines on interventions for cervical spine (facet) joint pain from a multispecialty international working group.

BACKGROUND: The past two decades have witnessed a surge in the use of cervical spine joint procedures including joint injections, nerve blocks and radiofrequency ablation to treat chronic neck pain, yet many aspects of the procedures remain controversial. METHODS: In August 2020, the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine and the American Academy of Pain Medicine approved and charged the Cervical Joint Working Group to develop neck pain guidelines. Eighteen stakeholder societies were identified, and formal request-for-participation and member nomination letters were sent to those organizations. Participating entities selected panel members and an ad hoc steering committee selected preliminary questions, which were then revised by the full committee. Each question was assigned to a module composed of 4-5 members, who worked with the Subcommittee Lead and the Committee Chairs on preliminary versions, which were sent to the full committee after revisions. We used a modified Delphi method whereby the questions were sent to the committee en bloc and comments were returned in a non-blinded fashion to the Chairs, who incorporated the comments and sent out revised versions until consensus was reached. Before commencing, it was agreed that a recommendation would be noted with >50% agreement among committee members, but a consensus recommendation would require ≥75% agreement. RESULTS: Twenty questions were selected, with 100% consensus achieved in committee on 17 topics. Among participating organizations, 14 of 15 that voted approved or supported the guidelines en bloc, with 14 questions being approved with no dissensions or abstentions. Specific questions addressed included the value of clinical presentation and imaging in selecting patients for procedures, whether conservative treatment should be used before injections, whether imaging is necessary for blocks, diagnostic and prognostic value of medial branch blocks and intra-articular joint injections, the effects of sedation and injectate volume on validity, whether facet blocks have therapeutic value, what the ideal cut-off value is for designating a block as positive, how many blocks should be performed before radiofrequency ablation, the orientation of electrodes, whether larger lesions translate into higher success rates, whether stimulation should be used before radiofrequency ablation, how best to mitigate complication risks, if different standards should be applied to clinical practice and trials, and the indications for repeating radiofrequency ablation. CONCLUSIONS: Cervical medial branch radiofrequency ablation may provide benefit to well-selected individuals, with medial branch blocks being more predictive than intra-articular injections. More stringent selection criteria are likely to improve denervation outcomes, but at the expense of false-negatives (ie, lower overall success rate). Clinical trials should be tailored based on objectives, and selection criteria for some may be more stringent than what is ideal in clinical practice.

The Diagnostic Value of an X-ray-based Scoring System for Degeneration of the Cervical Spine: A Reproducibility and Validation Study.

BACKGROUND: In interventional pain medicine, cervical facet joint (CFJ) pain is commonly treated with CFJ denervation techniques, almost automatically assuming degeneration of the CFJs as an important cause of CFJ pain. A standard cervical X-ray is still commonly used in the clinical evaluation of patients suspected for CFJ degeneration. Although degenerative features can be visualized by different radiological imaging techniques, the relation between radiological degenerative features of the cervical spine and pain remains controversial. Paramount in order to estimate the clinical usefulness of a radiological imaging is to establish the reproducibility of the radiological scoring system. A reproducible and clinically feasible diagnostic scoring system was developed to estimate cervical degeneration on standard cervical X-rays. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A reproducibility study for the interpretation of degenerative abnormalities on standard cervical X-rays was performed, using a dichotomous outcome (degenerative abnormalities present Yes/No). The estimation of intervertebral disc height loss on standard cervical X-rays was validated with computed tomography (CT) scan measurements. RESULTS: Five radiological degenerative features on standard cervical X-rays (disc height loss, anterior vertebral osteophytes, posterior vertebral osteophytes, vertebral end plate sclerosis, and uncovertebral osteoarthritis) showed a substantial to excellent reproducibility (kappa value ≥ 0.60). The qualitative definition of disc height loss used in the reproducibility study showed a substantial agreement with the actual measurements of disc height loss on CT scan (kappa value = 0.69). CONCLUSION: Subjective judgment of a cervical standard X-ray is a reproducible method to demonstrate degenerative abnormalities of the cervical spine.

Efficacy and Long-term Effect of Radiofrequency Denervation in Patients with Clinically Diagnosed Cervical Facet Joint Pain: A Double-blind Randomized Controlled Trial.

STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter double-blind randomized sham-controlled trial. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of radiofrequency (RF) denervation of the cervical facet joints in chronic cervical facet joint pain. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: One randomized controlled trial showed efficacy of RF denervation in whiplash-associated disease. There are no randomized controlled trials on RF denervation in patients with chronic cervical facet joint pain. METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive RF denervation combined with bupivacaine (intervention group) or bupivacaine alone (control group). In the intervention group, an RF thermal lesion was made at the cervical medial branches after the injection of bupivacaine. The primary outcome was measured at 6 months and consisted of pain intensity, self-reported treatment effect, improvement on the Neck Disability Index, and the use of pain medication. Duration of effect was determined using telephone interviews. RESULTS: We included 76 patients. In the intervention group, 55.6% showed > 30% pain decrease versus 51.3% in the control group (P = 0.711); 50.0% reported success on the Patients' Global Impression of Change in the intervention group versus 41.0% (P = 0.435); the Neck Disability Index was 15.0 ±â€Š8.7 in the intervention group compared with 16.5 ±â€Š7.2 (P = 0.432), the need for pain medication did not differ significantly between groups (P = 0.461). The median time to end of treatment success for patients in the RF group was 42 months, compared with 12 months in the bupivacaine group (P = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: We did not observe significant differences between RF denervation combined with injection of local anesthesia compared with local anesthesia only at 6 months follow-up. We found a difference in the long-term effect after 6 months follow-up in favor of the RF treatment.Level of Evidence: 2.

A Modified Posterolateral Approach for Radiofrequency Denervation of the Medial Branch of the Cervical Segmental Nerve in Cervical Facet Joint Pain Based on Anatomical Considerations.

The cervical facet joints, also called the zygapophyseal joints, are a potential source of neck pain (cervical facet joint pain). The cervical facet joints are innervated by the cervical medial branches (CMBs) of the cervical segmental nerves. Cervical facet joint pain has been shown to respond to multisegmental radiofrequency denervation of the cervical medial branches. This procedure is performed under fluoroscopic guidance. Currently, three approaches are described and used. Those three techniques of radiofrequency treatment of the CMBs, classified on the base of the needle trajectory toward the anatomical planes, are as follows: the posterolateral technique, the posterior technique, and the lateral technique. We describe the three techniques with their advantages and disadvantages. Anatomical studies providing a topographic anatomy of the course of the CMBs are reviewed. We developed a novel approach based on the observed strengths and weaknesses of the three currently used approaches and based on recent anatomical findings. With this fluoroscopic-guided approach, there is always bone (the facet column) in front of the needle, which makes it safer, and the insertion point is easier to determine without the risk of positioning the radiofrequency needle too dorsally.

Ultrasonography of the cervical spine: an in vitro anatomical validation model.

BACKGROUND: Anatomical validation studies of cervical ultrasound images are sparse. Validation is crucial to ensure accurate interpretation of cervical ultrasound images and to develop standardized reliable ultrasound procedures to identify cervical anatomical structures. The aim of this study was to acquire validated ultrasound images of cervical bony structures and to develop a reliable method to detect and count the cervical segmental levels. METHODS: An anatomical model of a cervical spine, embedded in gelatin, was inserted in a specially developed measurement device. This provided ultrasound images of cervical bony structures. Anatomical validation was achieved by laser light beams projecting the center of the ultrasound image on the cervical bony structures through a transparent gelatin. RESULTS: Anatomically validated ultrasound images of different cervical bony structures were taken from dorsal, ventral, and lateral perspectives. Potentially relevant anatomical landmarks were defined and validated. Test/retest analysis for positioning showed a reproducibility with an intraclass correlation coefficient for single measures of 0.99. Besides providing validated ultrasound images of bony structures, this model helped to develop a method to detect and count the cervical segmental levels in vivo at long-axis position, in a dorsolateral (paramedian) view at the level of the laminae, starting from the base of the skull and sliding the ultrasound probe caudally. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound bony images of the cervical vertebrae were validated with an in vitro model. Anatomical bony landmarks are the mastoid process, the transverse process of C1, the tubercles of C6 and C7, and the cervical laminae. Especially, the cervical dorsal laminae serve best as anatomical bony landmarks to reliably detect the cervical segmental levels in vivo.

Long-term follow-up of cervical facet medial branch radiofrequency treatment with the single posterior-lateral approach: an exploratory study.

BACKGROUND: Over 50% of patients presenting to pain clinic with neck pain have the cervical facet joints as the source of pain. Radiofrequency (RF) treatment of the medial branch, innervating the facet joint, is a therapeutic option. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the therapeutic effect and its duration of RF treatment, using the single posterior-lateral approach in patients suffering from facet joint degeneration and to identify predictors for a long-term effect. METHODS: Of the 130 consecutive patients with axial neck pain referred to the University Pain Center Maastricht, 67 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The therapeutic effect was measured using the Patients' Global Impression of Change (PGIC) scale. Retrospective data were made complete using newly collected PGIC follow-up data. A Kaplan-Meier curve evaluated the long-term therapeutic effect. Possible predictors of outcome were evaluated. RESULTS: Two patients refused to participate and in the remaining 65 patients, overall pain relief was reported in 55.4% at 2-month follow-up. Moderately, important change of improvement and substantial change of improvement were seen in 50.8% of patients. At 3-year follow-up, 30% still reported pain reduction. Spinal treatment level was the only predictor found. CONCLUSIONS: Radiofrequency treatment of the cervical facet joints using a single posterior-lateral approach is a promising technique in patients with chronic neck pain due to facet degeneration. The short-term and long-term therapeutic effects of this intervention justify a randomized controlled trial to estimate the efficacy of cervical facet joint RF treatment in a chronic neck pain population.

Validation of the Dutch version of the DN4 diagnostic questionnaire for neuropathic pain.

Difficulties in diagnosing neuropathic pain in routine clinical practice support the need for validated and easy-to-use diagnostic tools. The DN4 neuropathic pain diagnostic questionnaire aims to discriminate neuropathic pain from nociceptive pain, but needs clinical validation. A total of 269 patients with chronic pain in three pain clinics were included in the study of which 248 had analyzable data. The mean duration of pain was 4.9 years. The most frequent etiologies were posttraumatic (36%), (pseudo) radicular (14%), and mechanical back pain (12%). The mean intensity of pain at visit was 5.6 on a 0-10 scale. Hundred and ninety-six of 248 patients had an identical pain diagnosis from both physicians: 85 had neuropathic pain, 57 had nociceptive pain, and 54 had mixed pain. Among patients with identical diagnoses of neuropathic or nociceptive pain, using a receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.81 for the DN4 7-item and 0.82 for the 10-item version. A cutoff point of 5/10 for the full questionnaire resulted in a sensitivity of 75% and a specificity of 79%, while a cutoff point of 4/7 for the partial questionnaire resulted in a sensitivity of 74% and a specificity of 79%. The items "brushing," "painful cold," and "numbness" were most discriminating. The DN4 is an easy-to-use screening tool that is reliable for discriminating between neuropathic and nociceptive pain conditions in daily practice. Item-specific scores provide important information in addition to the total score.

5. Cervical facet pain.

More than 50% of patients presenting to a pain clinic with neck pain may suffer from facet-related pain. The most common symptom is unilateral pain without radiation to the arm. Rotation and retroflexion are frequently painful or limited. The history should exclude risk factors for serious underlying pathology (red flags). Radiculopathy may be excluded with neurologic testing. Direct correlation between degenerative changes observed with plain radiography, computerized tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging and pain has not been proven. Conservative treatment options for cervical facet pain such as physiotherapy, manipulation, and mobilization, although supported by little evidence, are frequently applied before considering interventional treatments. Interventional pain management techniques, including intra-articular steroid injections, medial branch blocks, and radiofrequency treatment, may be considered (0). At present, there is no evidence to support cervical intra-articular corticosteroid injection. When applied, this should be done in the context of a study. Therapeutic repetitive medial branch blocks, with or without corticosteroid added to the local anesthetic, result in a comparable short-term pain relief (2 B+). Radiofrequency treatment of the ramus medialis of the cervical ramus dorsalis (facet) may be considered. The evidence to support its use in the management of degenerative cervical facet joint pain is derived from observational studies (2 C+).

Radiofrequency and pulsed radiofrequency treatment of chronic pain syndromes: the available evidence.

There are currently 6 reviews on (pulsed) radiofrequency (RF) for the management of spinal pain. Two reviews on interventional pain management techniques in general also discuss RF. The outcomes of those reviews depend on the type of studies included and the opinion of the reviewers, which may result in different evidence levels. Radiofrequency denervation at the cervical and lumbar level has produced the most solid evidence. The differences in treatment outcome registered in the 5 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) regarding lumbar facet denervation can be attributed to differences in patient selection and/or inappropriate technique. There is not sufficient evidence supporting the use of RF facet denervation for the management of cervicogenic headache. The studies examining the management of cervical radicular pain suggest a comparable efficacy for RF and pulsed RF (PRF). The PRF treatment is supposed to be safer and therefore should be preferred. The superiority of RF treatment adjacent to the lumbar dorsal root ganglion for the management of lumbar radicular pain has not been demonstrated in an RCT. Information regarding RF treatment of sacroiliac joint pain is accumulating. No randomized sham-controlled trials on the value of RF treatment of the Gasserian ganglion for the management of idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia have been published. One RCT indicates superiority of RF over PRF for the management of idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia. Future research to confirm or deny the efficacy of (P)RF should be conducted in carefully selected patient populations. The tests used for patient inclusion in such a trial could potentially help the clinician in selecting patients for this type of treatment. The value of PRF treatment of the peripheral nerves also needs to be confirmed in well-designed trials.

Continuous positive airway pressure breathing increases cranial spread of sensory blockade after cervicothoracic epidural injection of lidocaine.

BACKGROUND: Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) increases the caudad spread of sensory blockade after low-thoracic epidural injection of lidocaine. We hypothesized that CPAP would increase cephalad spread of blockade after cervicothoracic epidural injection. METHODS: Twenty patients with an epidural catheter at the C6-7 or C7-T1 interspace received an epidural dose of lidocaine while breathing at ambient pressure (control group), or while breathing with 7.5 cm H2O CPAP. After injection, we evaluated the spread of sensory blockade. Spirometry variables before and after epidural injection were also measured. RESULTS: Data are presented as median (interquartile range) values. Sensory block ranged from C7 (C4-7) to T4 (T4-6) in the control group and from C2 (C2-4) to T4 (T2-5) in the CPAP group (P = 0.003 for the cranial border). The total number of segments blocked was 7.5 (6.8-9.8) in the control group and 10 (8-12) in the CPAP group (P = 0.13). The number of segments blocked cranial to the injection site was one (0.8-3.5) in the control group and five (3.5-7) in the CPAP group (P = 0.006). The number of patients with a maximal cranial block (up to C2) was one in the control group and seven in the CPAP group (P = 0.02). In both groups, there was a small but significant decrease from baseline in spirometry values, with no differences between groups. CONCLUSION: Applying CPAP during cervicothoracic epidural injection of lidocaine resulted in a more cranial extension of sensory blockade when compared with breathing at ambient pressure.