JOURNAL ARTICLE

The Effectiveness of Cervical Medial Branch Radiofrequency Ablation for Chronic Facet Joint Syndrome in Patients Selected by a Practical Medial Branch Block Paradigm

Taylor Burnham, Aaron Conger, Fabio Salazar, Russell Petersen, Richard Kendall, Shellie Cunningham, Masaru Teramoto, Zachary L McCormick
Pain Medicine: the Official Journal of the American Academy of Pain Medicine 2020 February 5
32022889

BACKGROUND: Cervical medial branch radiofrequency ablation (CMBRFA) is an effective treatment for facetogenic pain in patients selected by Spine Intervention Society (SIS) guidelines of 100% symptom improvement with dual medial branch blocks (MBBs) ± placebo block. Patient selection for CMBRFA using ≥80% symptom improvement after dual concordant MBBs is common; however, this has not been studied.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of CMBRFA and compare outcomes in individuals selected by 80-99% vs 100% symptom improvement with dual concordant MBBs.

DESIGN: Cross-sectional cohort study.

METHODS: Medical records of 87 consecutive patients were reviewed; 50 met inclusion criteria. A standardized telephone survey was performed at six or more months post-CMBRFA to query numerical rating scale (NRS) pain and patient global impression of change (PGIC) scores. The primary outcomes were the proportion of patients reporting ≥50% reduction of index pain.

RESULTS: At a mean follow-up time of 16.9 ± 12.7 months, 54% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 35-73%) and 54% (95% CI = 32-74%) of the 80-99% and 100% MBBs groups, respectively, reported ≥50% pain reduction. Between-group comparison showed a relative risk of 0.99 (95% CI = 0.59-1.66) for meeting the primary outcome. Seventy percent (95% CI = 56-81%) of patients reported a PGIC score consistent with "improved or very much improved" at follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS: CMBRFA is an effective treatment in patients who report ≥80% symptom relief with dual concordant MBBs. The present study demonstrated an overall ≥50% pain reduction rate of 54% and no significant difference between those selected by 80-99% vs 100% symptom relief with dual concordant MBBs.

Full Text Links

Find Full Text Links for this Article

Discussion

You are not logged in. Sign Up or Log In to join the discussion.

Related Papers

Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read
32022889
×

Save your favorite articles in one place with a free QxMD account.

×

Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"