Back Pain: Sehgal N

Boswell MV, Trescot AM, Datta S, Schultz DM, Hansen HC, Abdi S, Sehgal N, Shah RV, Singh V, Benyamin RM, Patel VB, Buenaventura RM, Colson JD, Cordner HJ, Epter RS, Jasper JF, Dunbar EE, Atluri SL, Bowman RC, Deer TR, Swicegood JR, Staats PS, Smith HS, Burton AW, Kloth DS, Giordano J, Manchikanti L, Anonymous00089. · American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians, Paducah, KY 42001, USA. · Pain Physician. · Pubmed #17256025 links to  free full text

Abstract: BACKGROUND: The evidence-based practice guidelines for the management of chronic spinal pain with interventional techniques were developed to provide recommendations to clinicians in the United States. OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for interventional techniques in the diagnosis and treatment of chronic spinal pain, utilizing all types of evidence and to apply an evidence-based approach, with broad representation by specialists from academic and clinical practices. DESIGN: Study design consisted of formulation of essentials of guidelines and a series of potential evidence linkages representing conclusions and statements about relationships between clinical interventions and outcomes. METHODS: The elements of the guideline preparation process included literature searches, literature synthesis, systematic review, consensus evaluation, open forum presentation, and blinded peer review. Methodologic quality evaluation criteria utilized included the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) criteria, Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) criteria, and Cochrane review criteria. The designation of levels of evidence was from Level I (conclusive), Level II (strong), Level III (moderate), Level IV (limited), to Level V (indeterminate). RESULTS: Among the diagnostic interventions, the accuracy of facet joint nerve blocks is strong in the diagnosis of lumbar and cervical facet joint pain, whereas, it is moderate in the diagnosis of thoracic facet joint pain. The evidence is strong for lumbar discography, whereas, the evidence is limited for cervical and thoracic discography. The evidence for transforaminal epidural injections or selective nerve root blocks in the preoperative evaluation of patients with negative or inconclusive imaging studies is moderate. The evidence for diagnostic sacroiliac joint injections is moderate. The evidence for therapeutic lumbar intraarticular facet injections is moderate for short-term and long-term improvement, whereas, it is limited for cervical facet joint injections. The evidence for lumbar and cervical medial branch blocks is moderate. The evidence for medial branch neurotomy is moderate. The evidence for caudal epidural steroid injections is strong for short-term relief and moderate for long-term relief in managing chronic low back and radicular pain, and limited in managing pain of postlumbar laminectomy syndrome. The evidence for interlaminar epidural steroid injections is strong for short-term relief and limited for long-term relief in managing lumbar radiculopathy, whereas, for cervical radiculopathy the evidence is moderate. The evidence for transforaminal epidural steroid injections is strong for short-term and moderate for long-term improvement in managing lumbar nerve root pain, whereas, it is moderate for cervical nerve root pain and limited in managing pain secondary to lumbar post laminectomy syndrome and spinal stenosis. The evidence for percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis is strong. For spinal endoscopic adhesiolysis, the evidence is strong for short-term relief and moderate for long-term relief. For sacroiliac intraarticular injections, the evidence is moderate for short-term relief and limited for long-term relief. The evidence for radiofrequency neurotomy for sacroiliac joint pain is limited.The evidence for intradiscal electrothermal therapy is moderate in managing chronic discogenic low back pain, whereas for annuloplasty the evidence is limited. Among the various techniques utilized for percutaneous disc decompression, the evidence is moderate for short-term and limited for long-term relief for automated percutaneous lumbar discectomy, and percutaneous laser discectomy, whereas it is limited for nucleoplasty and for DeKompressor technology. For vertebral augmentation procedures, the evidence is moderate for both vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty. The evidence for spinal cord stimulation in failed back surgery syndrome and complex regional pain syndrome is strong for short-term relief and moderate for long-term relief. The evidence for implantable intrathecal infusion systems is strong for short-term relief and moderate for long-term relief. CONCLUSION: These guidelines include the evaluation of evidence for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in managing chronic spinal pain and recommendations for managing spinal pain. However, these guidelines do not constitute inflexible treatment recommendations. These guidelines also do not represent a "standard of care."

Boswell MV, Colson JD, Sehgal N, Dunbar EE, Epter R. · Texas Tech University Health Science Center, Lubbock, TX, USA. · Pain Physician. · Pubmed #17256032 links to  free full text

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Facet joints are considered to be a common source of chronic spinal pain. Facet joint interventions, including intraarticular injections, medial branch nerve blocks, and neurotomy (radiofrequency and cryoneurolysis) are used to manage chronic facet-mediated spinal pain. A systematic review of therapeutic facet interventions published in January 2005, concluded that facet interventions were variably effective for short-term and long-term relief of facet joint pain. OBJECTIVE: To provide an updated evaluation of the effectiveness of 3 types of facet joint interventions in managing chronic spinal pain. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review utilizing criteria established by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) for evaluation of randomized and non-randomized trials and the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group for randomized trials. METHODS: Data sources included relevant literature of the English language identified through searches of MEDLINE and EMBASE (November 2004 to December 2006) and manual searches of bibliographies of known primary and review articles within the last 2 years. Results of the analyses were performed for the different modes of facet joint interventions for the cervical, thoracic and lumbar spine, to determine short- and long-term outcome measurements and complications associated with these procedures. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was pain relief. For intraarticular facet joint injections and medial branch blocks, short-term pain relief was defined as relief lasting less than 6 weeks and long-term relief as 6 weeks or longer. For medial branch blocks, repeated injections at defined intervals provided long-term pain relief. For medial branch radiofrequency neurotomy, short-term pain relief was defined as relief lasting less than 3 months and long-term relief as lasting 3 months or longer. Other outcome measures included functional improvement, improvement of psychological status, and return to work. RESULTS: For cervical intraarticular facet joint injections, the evidence is limited for short- and long-term pain relief. For lumbar intraarticular facet joint injections, the evidence is moderate for short- and long-term pain relief. For cervical, thoracic, and lumbar medial branch nerve blocks with local anesthetics (with or without steroids), the evidence is moderate for short- and long-term pain relief with repeat interventions. The evidence for pain relief with radiofrequency neurotomy of cervical and lumbar medial branch nerves is moderate for short- and long-term pain relief, and indeterminate for thoracic facet neurotomy. CONCLUSION: With intraarticular facet joint injections, the evidence for short- and long-term pain relief is limited for cervical pain and moderate for lumbar pain. For medial branch blocks, the evidence is moderate for short- and long-term pain relief. For medial branch neurotomy, the evidence is moderate for short- and long-term pain relief.

Sehgal N, Dunbar EE, Shah RV, Colson J. · University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI 53595, USA. · Pain Physician. · Pubmed #17256031 links to  free full text

Abstract: BACKGROUND: A 2-year review of literature from October 2004 to December 2006 was completed to update current scientific evidence on diagnostic utility of facet joint injections. Diagnostic injections are employed to diagnose facet joint pain because available techniques cannot identify the pain generating structure in patients with chronic spinal pain. There is no physical examination technique, laboratory test, or imaging modality that can precisely identify the spinal structure causing pain, distinguish the culprit from a variety of potential targets, and predict response to a therapeutic intervention. Zygapophysial joint injections, commonly called facet injections (intraarticular joint injections and medial branch blocks) are local anesthetic injections of the facet joint or its nerve supply. These are diagnostic procedures used to determine if pain is arising from facet joints, distinguish painful from nonpainful joints and prognosticate response to therapeutic facet joint interventions. Diagnostic injections must meet the cardinal features of a diagnostic test i.e., accuracy, safety, and reproducibility. Accuracy is based on comparison with a "gold standard" to confirm presence or absence of a disease. There is, however, no available gold standard to measure presence or absence of pain. Hence, there is a degree of uncertainty concerning the accuracy of diagnostic facet joint injections. OBJECTIVES: Evaluate and update available evidence (2004 to 2006) relating to clinical utility of facet joint injections (intraarticular and medial branch blocks) in diagnosing chronic spinal pain of facet joint origin. STUDY DESIGN: Review of the literature for clinical studies on efficacy and utility of facet joint/nerve injections in diagnosing facet joint pain according to Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and Quality Assessment Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy (QUADAS) criteria. The level of evidence was classified as conclusive (Level I), strong (Level II), moderate (Level III), or limited (Level IV). METHODS: Computerized database search (2004 to 2006) of PUBMED, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Knowledge was conducted to identify studies on facet joint pain and diagnostic interventions. Abstracts, reviews, book chapters, case reports, studies based on single blocks or blocks without radiologic control, and studies describing techniques were excluded. Prospective studies were given priority over retrospective studies. RESULTS: There is no change in the strength of evidence for facet joint diagnostic injections. There is strong evidence for controlled comparative local anesthetic facet joint injections or medial branch blocks in the diagnosis of neck and low back pain and moderate evidence in the diagnosis of pain arising from thoracic facet joints. CONCLUSION: The evidence obtained from literature review suggests that controlled comparative local anesthetic blocks of facet joints (medial branch or dorsal ramus) are reproducible, reasonably accurate and safe. The sensitivity, specificity, false-positive rates, and predictive values of these diagnostic tests for neck and low back pain have been validated and reproduced in multiple studies.

Sehgal N, Fortin JD. · Spine Technology and Rehabilitation, 7230 Engle Road, Suite 210, Fort Wayne, IN 46804, USA. · Pain Physician. · Pubmed #16906194 links to  free full text

Abstract: Internal disc disruption is a common cause of disabling low back pain in a substantial number of young, healthy adults. Crock described this painful entity and reported annular fissures that distort the internal architecture of the disc; Externally the disc appears relatively intact and undeformed. A clinical diagnosis of internal disc disruption, in absence of objective clinical findings, is extremely difficult. The only convincing means to establish the diagnosis is provocation discography. Unfortunately, this procedure is controversial, making the existence of internal disc disruption suspect. Recent studies indicate the existence of a biochemical/ biomechanical model of discogenic pain, which explains the disabling low back pain in some subjects with no objective evidence of nerve-root compromise. However, a reluctance to acknowledge internal disc disruption as a valid clinical entity delays diagnosis and treatment. Failure to identify and treat this entity early and aggressively results in longterm disability, thereby perpetuating the enigma of chronic low back pain.

Sehgal N, Shah RV, McKenzie-Brown AM, Everett CR. · UW Interventional Pain Program, University of Wisconsin Medical School, Dept, of Orthopedics and Rehabillitation, 600 Highland Avenue, #2424, Madison, WI 53792, USA. · Pain Physician. · Pubmed #16850075 links to  free full text

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Chronic refractory spinal pain poses a peculiar diagnostic challenge because of multiple putative pain sources, overlapping clinical features, and nonspecific radiologic findings. Diagnostic injection techniques are employed to isolate the source(s) of pain. Facet or zygapophysial joint pain is an example of spinal pain diagnosed by local anesthetic injections of the facet joint or its nerve supply. Diagnostic facet joint injections are expected to meet the cardinal features of a diagnostic test (i.e., accuracy, safety and reproducibility). Accuracy must be compared with a "gold" or criterion standard that can confirm presence or absence of a disease. There is, however, no available gold standard, such as biopsy, to measure presence or absence of pain. Hence, there is a degree of uncertainty concerning the accuracy of diagnostic facet joint injections. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate accuracy, safety and reproducibility of facet or zygapophysial joint injections in diagnosing chronic spinal pain of facet joint origin. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review of the literature for clinical studies on efficacy and utility of facet joint/nerve injections in diagnosing spinal pain from facet joints. METHODS: Relevant literature on diagnostic facet injections was identified through database searches. Excluded were abstracts, reviews, book chapters, case reports and studies based on single blocks or blocks without radiologic control. Prospective studies with placebo control, or controlled comparative local anesthetic blocks, were given priority over retrospective studies. Each study was graded using AHRQ and QUADAS criteria. The level of evidence was classified as conclusive, strong, moderate, limited, or inconclusive. RESULTS: Available literature pointed to strong evidence for controlled comparative local anesthetic facet joint medial branch blocks in the diagnosis of neck and low back pain. There was moderate evidence in the diagnosis of pain arising from thoracic facet joints. CONCLUSION: The evidence obtained from literature review suggests that controlled comparative local anesthetic blocks of facet joint nerves (medial branch or dorsal ramus) are reproducible, reasonably accurate, and safe. The sensitivity, specificity, false-positive rates, and predictive values of these diagnostic tests for neck and low back pain have been validated and reproduced in multiple studies.

McKenzie-Brown AM, Shah RV, Sehgal N, Everett CR. · Division of Pain Medicine Emory Department of Anesthesiology, Emory Center for Pain Medicine, 550 Peachtree Street, NE Atlanta GA 30308, USA. · Pain Physician. · Pubmed #16850049 links to  free full text

Abstract: BACKGROUND: The sacroiliac joint is an accepted source of low back pain with or without associated lower extremity symptoms. The diagnosis and management of sacroiliac joint pain and the role of interventional techniques have been controversial. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical usefulness of sacroiliac joint interventions in the diagnosis and management of sacroiliac joint pain. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review using the criteria as outlined by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Cochrane Review Group Criteria, and QUADAS criteria for diagnostic studies. METHODS: The databases of EMBASE and MEDLINE (1966 to November 2004), and Cochrane Review were searched. The searches included systematic reviews, narrative reviews, prospective and retrospective studies, and cross-references from articles reviewed. The search strategy included sacroiliac joint pain and dysfunction, sacroiliac joint injections, interventions, and radiofrequency. RESULTS: The results of this systematic evaluation showed that for diagnostic purposes, there is moderate evidence showing the accuracy of comparative, controlled local anesthetic blocks. Prevalence of sacroiliac joint pain was demonstrated to be 10% to 19% by a double block paradigm. The false-positive rate of single, uncontrolled, sacroiliac joint injections was reported as 20%.For therapeutic purposes intraarticular sacroiliac joint injections with steroid and radiofrequency neurotomy were evaluated. Based on this review, there was moderate evidence for short-term and limited evidence for long-term relief with intraarticular sacroiliac joint injections. Evidence for radiofrequency neurotomy in managing sacroiliac joint pain was limited or inconclusive. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence for the specificity and validity of diagnostic sacroiliac joint injections was moderate.The evidence for therapeutic intraarticular sacroiliac joint injections was limited to moderate. The evidence for radiofrequency neurotomy in managing chronic sacroiliac joint pain was limited.

Boswell MV, Shah RV, Everett CR, Sehgal N, McKenzie Brown AM, Abdi S, Bowman RC, Deer TR, Datta S, Colson JD, Spillane WF, Smith HS, Lucas LF, Burton AW, Chopra P, Staats PS, Wasserman RA, Manchikanti L. · Department of Anesthesiology, University Hospitals of Cleveland Case School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio 44106, USA. · Pain Physician. · Pubmed #16850041 links to  free full text

Abstract: BACKGROUND: The lifetime prevalence of spinal pain has been reported as 54% to 80%, with as many as 60% of patients continuing to have chronic pain five years or longer after the initial episode. Spinal pain is associated with significant economic, societal, and health impact. Available evidence documents a wide degree of variance in the definition and the practice of interventional pain management. OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for interventional techniques in the management of chronic spinal pain, with utilization of all types of evidence, applying an evidence-based approach, with broad representation of specialists from academic and clinical practices. DESIGN: A systematic review of diagnostic and therapeutic interventions applied in managing chronic spinal pain by a policy committee. Design consisted of formulation of essentials of guidelines and a series of potential evidence linkages representing conclusions, and statements about relationships between clinical interventions and outcomes. METHODS: The elements of the guideline preparation process included literature searches, literature synthesis, systematic review, consensus evaluation, open forum presentation, formal endorsement by the Board of Directors of the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP), and blinded peer review. Methodologic quality evaluation criteria utilized included AHRQ criteria, QUADAS criteria, and Cochrane review criteria. The designation of levels of evidence was from Level I (conclusive), Level II (strong), Level III (moderate), Level IV (limited), to Level V (indeterminate). RESULTS: The accuracy of facet joint nerve blocks was strong in the diagnosis of lumbar and cervical facet joint pain, whereas, it was moderate in the diagnosis of thoracic facet joint pain. The evidence was strong for lumbar discography, whereas, the evidence was limited for cervical and thoracic discography. The evidence was moderate for transforaminal epidural injections or selective nerve root blocks in the preoperative evaluation of patients with negative or inconclusive imaging studies. The evidence was moderate for sacroiliac joint injections in the diagnosis of sacroiliac joint pain. The evidence for therapeutic lumbar intraarticular facet injections of local anesthetics and steroids was moderate for short-term improvement and limited for long-term improvement, whereas, it was negative for cervical facet joint injections. The evidence for lumbar and cervical medial branch blocks was moderate. The evidence for medial branch neurotomy was moderate to strong for relief of chronic low back and neck pain. The evidence for caudal epidural steroid injections was strong for short-term relief and moderate for long-term relief in managing chronic low back and radicular pain, and limited in managing pain of postlumbar laminectomy syndrome. The evidence for interlaminar epidural steroid injections was strong for short-term relief and limited for long-term relief in managing lumbar radiculopathy, whereas, for cervical radiculopathy the evidence was moderate. The evidence for transforaminal epidural steroid injections was strong for short-term and moderate for long-term improvement in managing lumbar nerve root pain, whereas, it was moderate for cervical nerve root pain and limited for lumbar post laminectomy syndrome and spinal stenosis. The evidence for percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis was strong. For spinal endoscopic adhesiolysis, the evidence was strong for short-term relief and moderate for long-term relief. For sacroiliac intraarticular injections, the evidence was moderate for short-term relief and limited for long-term relief. The evidence for radiofrequency neurotomy for sacroiliac joint pain was indeterminate. The evidence for intradiscal electrothermal therapy was strong for short-term relief and moderate for long-term relief in managing chronic discogenic low back pain, whereas, for nucleoplasty, the evidence was limited. The evidence for spinal cord stimulation in failed back surgery syndrome and complex regional pain syndrome was strong for short-term relief and moderate for long-term relief. The evidence for implantable intrathecal infusion systems was moderate to strong. CONCLUSION: These guidelines included the evaluation of evidence for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in managing chronic spinal pain and recommendations for managing spinal pain. However, these guidelines do not constitute inflexible treatment recommendations. These guidelines do not represent "a standard of care".