-
Nature Reviews. Rheumatology Apr 2013Osteoarthritis (OA) of the spine involves the facet joints, which are located in the posterior aspect of the vertebral column and, in humans, are the only true synovial... (Review)
Review
Osteoarthritis (OA) of the spine involves the facet joints, which are located in the posterior aspect of the vertebral column and, in humans, are the only true synovial joints between adjacent spinal levels. Facet joint osteoarthritis (FJ OA) is widely prevalent in older adults, and is thought to be a common cause of back and neck pain. The prevalence of facet-mediated pain in clinical populations increases with increasing age, suggesting that FJ OA might have a particularly important role in older adults with spinal pain. Nevertheless, to date FJ OA has received far less study than other important OA phenotypes such as knee OA, and other features of spine pathoanatomy such as degenerative disc disease. This Review presents the current state of knowledge of FJ OA, including relevant anatomy, biomechanics, epidemiology, and clinical manifestations. We present the view that the modern concept of FJ OA is consonant with the concept of OA as a failure of the whole joint, and not simply of facet joint cartilage.
Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Back Pain; Biomechanical Phenomena; Cervical Vertebrae; Diagnostic Imaging; Female; Humans; Lumbar Vertebrae; Male; Middle Aged; Neck Pain; Osteoarthritis; Pain Measurement; Prevalence; Prognosis; Risk Assessment; Severity of Illness Index; Spinal Diseases; Treatment Outcome; Zygapophyseal Joint
PubMed: 23147891
DOI: 10.1038/nrrheum.2012.199 -
Journal of Biomechanical Engineering Jul 2011The facet joint is a crucial anatomic region of the spine owing to its biomechanical role in facilitating articulation of the vertebrae of the spinal column. It is a... (Review)
Review
The facet joint is a crucial anatomic region of the spine owing to its biomechanical role in facilitating articulation of the vertebrae of the spinal column. It is a diarthrodial joint with opposing articular cartilage surfaces that provide a low friction environment and a ligamentous capsule that encloses the joint space. Together with the disc, the bilateral facet joints transfer loads and guide and constrain motions in the spine due to their geometry and mechanical function. Although a great deal of research has focused on defining the biomechanics of the spine and the form and function of the disc, the facet joint has only recently become the focus of experimental, computational and clinical studies. This mechanical behavior ensures the normal health and function of the spine during physiologic loading but can also lead to its dysfunction when the tissues of the facet joint are altered either by injury, degeneration or as a result of surgical modification of the spine. The anatomical, biomechanical and physiological characteristics of the facet joints in the cervical and lumbar spines have become the focus of increased attention recently with the advent of surgical procedures of the spine, such as disc repair and replacement, which may impact facet responses. Accordingly, this review summarizes the relevant anatomy and biomechanics of the facet joint and the individual tissues that comprise it. In order to better understand the physiological implications of tissue loading in all conditions, a review of mechanotransduction pathways in the cartilage, ligament and bone is also presented ranging from the tissue-level scale to cellular modifications. With this context, experimental studies are summarized as they relate to the most common modifications that alter the biomechanics and health of the spine-injury and degeneration. In addition, many computational and finite element models have been developed that enable more-detailed and specific investigations of the facet joint and its tissues than are provided by experimental approaches and also that expand their utility for the field of biomechanics. These are also reviewed to provide a more complete summary of the current knowledge of facet joint mechanics. Overall, the goal of this review is to present a comprehensive review of the breadth and depth of knowledge regarding the mechanical and adaptive responses of the facet joint and its tissues across a variety of relevant size scales.
Topics: Biomechanical Phenomena; Cartilage, Articular; Cervical Vertebrae; Computer Simulation; Finite Element Analysis; Humans; Intervertebral Disc Displacement; Joint Capsule; Ligaments, Articular; Lumbar Vertebrae; Mechanotransduction, Cellular; Range of Motion, Articular; Spine; Stress, Mechanical; Total Disc Replacement; Zygapophyseal Joint
PubMed: 21823749
DOI: 10.1115/1.4004493 -
Folia Morphologica 2021Lumbar facet joints (LFJs) are diarthrodial joints which provide articulation between two adjacent lumbar vertebrae. LFJs represent complex anatomic structures with... (Review)
Review
Lumbar facet joints (LFJs) are diarthrodial joints which provide articulation between two adjacent lumbar vertebrae. LFJs represent complex anatomic structures with multifaceted biomechanical and functional characteristics. They are theorized as structures of crucial clinical significance since their degenerative morphologic alterations are frequently related to emergence of low back pain. Despite the emerging interest in describing LFJs anatomy in recent years, precise description of LFJs innervation remains controversial. In this comprehensive review, anatomy and biomechanical importance of LFJs and associated adjacent extra-articular structures are thoroughly presented. Furthermore, LFJs innervation in respect to current literature data is punctually analysed. Knowledge of anatomy and innervation LFJs of critical importance for clinicians and spine surgeons, so that patients are properly evaluated and related therapeutic procedures are rationally performed.
Topics: Humans; Low Back Pain; Lumbar Vertebrae; Lumbosacral Region; Zygapophyseal Joint
PubMed: 33084010
DOI: 10.5603/FM.a2020.0122 -
Anesthesiology Mar 2007Lumbar zygapophysial joint arthropathy is a challenging condition affecting up to 15% of patients with chronic low back pain. The onset of lumbar facet joint pain is... (Review)
Review
Lumbar zygapophysial joint arthropathy is a challenging condition affecting up to 15% of patients with chronic low back pain. The onset of lumbar facet joint pain is usually insidious, with predisposing factors including spondylolisthesis, degenerative disc pathology, and old age. Despite previous reports of a "facet syndrome," the existing literature does not support the use of historic or physical examination findings to diagnose lumbar zygapophysial joint pain. The most accepted method for diagnosing pain arising from the lumbar facet joints is with low-volume intraarticular or medial branch blocks, both of which are associated with high false-positive rates. Standard treatment modalities for lumbar zygapophysial joint pain include intraarticular steroid injections and radiofrequency denervation of the medial branches innervating the joints, but the evidence supporting both of these is conflicting. In this article, the authors provide a comprehensive review of the anatomy, biomechanics, and function of the lumbar zygapophysial joints, along with a systematic analysis of the diagnosis and treatment of facet joint pain.
Topics: Animals; Arthralgia; Catheter Ablation; Clinical Trials as Topic; Diagnostic Errors; Female; Humans; Lumbar Vertebrae; Male; Medical Illustration; Nerve Block; Steroids; Zygapophyseal Joint
PubMed: 17325518
DOI: 10.1097/00000542-200703000-00024 -
Pain Physician May 2020Chronic axial spinal pain is one of the major causes of significant disability and health care costs, with facet joints as one of the proven causes of pain.
Comprehensive Evidence-Based Guidelines for Facet Joint Interventions in the Management of Chronic Spinal Pain: American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP) Guidelines Facet Joint Interventions 2020 Guidelines.
BACKGROUND
Chronic axial spinal pain is one of the major causes of significant disability and health care costs, with facet joints as one of the proven causes of pain.
OBJECTIVE
To provide evidence-based guidance in performing diagnostic and therapeutic facet joint interventions.
METHODS
The methodology utilized included the development of objectives and key questions with utilization of trustworthy standards. The literature pertaining to all aspects of facet joint interventions, was reviewed, with a best evidence synthesis of available literature and utilizing grading for recommendations.Summary of Evidence and Recommendations:Non-interventional diagnosis: • The level of evidence is II in selecting patients for facet joint nerve blocks at least 3 months after onset and failure of conservative management, with strong strength of recommendation for physical examination and clinical assessment. • The level of evidence is IV for accurate diagnosis of facet joint pain with physical examination based on symptoms and signs, with weak strength of recommendation. Imaging: • The level of evidence is I with strong strength of recommendation, for mandatory fluoroscopic or computed tomography (CT) guidance for all facet joint interventions. • The level of evidence is III with weak strength of recommendation for single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) . • The level of evidence is V with weak strength of recommendation for scintography, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and computed tomography (CT) .Interventional Diagnosis:Lumbar Spine: • The level of evidence is I to II with moderate to strong strength of recommendation for lumbar diagnostic facet joint nerve blocks. • Ten relevant diagnostic accuracy studies with 4 of 10 studies utilizing controlled comparative local anesthetics with concordant pain relief criterion standard of ≥80% were included. • The prevalence rates ranged from 27% to 40% with false-positive rates of 27% to 47%, with ≥80% pain relief.Cervical Spine: • The level of evidence is II with moderate strength of recommendation. • Ten relevant diagnostic accuracy studies, 9 of the 10 studies with either controlled comparative local anesthetic blocks or placebo controls with concordant pain relief with a criterion standard of ≥80% were included. • The prevalence and false-positive rates ranged from 29% to 60% and of 27% to 63%, with high variability. Thoracic Spine: • The level of evidence is II with moderate strength of recommendation. • Three relevant diagnostic accuracy studies, with controlled comparative local anesthetic blocks, with concordant pain relief, with a criterion standard of ≥80% were included. • The prevalence varied from 34% to 48%, whereas false-positive rates varied from 42% to 58%.Therapeutic Facet Joint Interventions: Lumbar Spine: • The level of evidence is II with moderate strength of recommendation for lumbar radiofrequency ablation with inclusion of 11 relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 2 negative studies and 4 studies with long-term improvement. • The level of evidence is II with moderate strength of recommendation for therapeutic lumbar facet joint nerve blocks with inclusion of 3 relevant randomized controlled trials, with long-term improvement. • The level of evidence is IV with weak strength of recommendation for lumbar facet joint intraarticular injections with inclusion of 9 relevant randomized controlled trials, with majority of them showing lack of effectiveness without the use of local anesthetic. Cervical Spine: • The level of evidence is II with moderate strength of recommendation for cervical radiofrequency ablation with inclusion of one randomized controlled trial with positive results and 2 observational studies with long-term improvement. • The level of evidence is II with moderate strength of recommendation for therapeutic cervical facet joint nerve blocks with inclusion of one relevant randomized controlled trial and 3 observational studies, with long-term improvement. • The level of evidence is V with weak strength of recommendation for cervical intraarticular facet joint injections with inclusion of 3 relevant randomized controlled trials, with 2 observational studies, the majority showing lack of effectiveness, whereas one study with 6-month follow-up, showed lack of long-term improvement. Thoracic Spine: • The level of evidence is III with weak to moderate strength of recommendation with emerging evidence for thoracic radiofrequency ablation with inclusion of one relevant randomized controlled trial and 3 observational studies. • The level of evidence is II with moderate strength of recommendation for thoracic therapeutic facet joint nerve blocks with inclusion of 2 randomized controlled trials and one observational study with long-term improvement. • The level of evidence is III with weak to moderate strength of recommendation for thoracic intraarticular facet joint injections with inclusion of one randomized controlled trial with 6 month follow-up, with emerging evidence. Antithrombotic Therapy: • Facet joint interventions are considered as moderate to low risk procedures; consequently, antithrombotic therapy may be continued based on overall general status. Sedation: • The level of evidence is II with moderate strength of recommendation to avoid opioid analgesics during the diagnosis with interventional techniques. • The level of evidence is II with moderate strength of recommendation that moderate sedation may be utilized for patient comfort and to control anxiety for therapeutic facet joint interventions.
LIMITATIONS
The limitations of these guidelines include a paucity of high-quality studies in the majority of aspects of diagnosis and therapy.
CONCLUSIONS
These facet joint intervention guidelines were prepared with a comprehensive review of the literature with methodologic quality assessment with determination of level of evidence and strength of recommendations.
KEY WORDS
Chronic spinal pain, interventional techniques, diagnostic blocks, therapeutic interventions, facet joint nerve blocks, intraarticular injections, radiofrequency neurolysis.
Topics: Back Pain; Chronic Pain; Humans; Pain Management; United States; Zygapophyseal Joint
PubMed: 32503359
DOI: No ID Found -
Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine Jan 2022The 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...
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.
Topics: Arthralgia; Cervical Vertebrae; Humans; Injections, Intra-Articular; Neck Pain; Zygapophyseal Joint
PubMed: 34764220
DOI: 10.1136/rapm-2021-103031 -
Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine Jun 2020The past two decades have witnessed a surge in the use of lumbar facet blocks and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) to treat low back pain (LBP), yet nearly all aspects of...
BACKGROUND
The past two decades have witnessed a surge in the use of lumbar facet blocks and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) to treat low back pain (LBP), yet nearly all aspects of the procedures remain controversial.
METHODS
After approval by the Board of Directors of the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, letters were sent to a dozen pain societies, as well as representatives from the US Departments of Veterans Affairs and Defense. A steering committee was convened to select preliminary questions, which were revised by the full committee. Questions were assigned to 4-5 person modules, who worked with the Subcommittee Lead and Committee Chair on preliminary versions, which were sent to the full committee. 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 Chair, who incorporated the comments and sent out revised versions until consensus was reached.
RESULTS
17 questions were selected for guideline development, with 100% consensus achieved by committee members on all topics. All societies except for one approved every recommendation, with one society dissenting on two questions (number of blocks and cut-off for a positive block before RFA), but approving the document. Specific questions that were addressed included the value of history and physical examination in selecting patients for blocks, the value of imaging in patient selection, whether conservative treatment should be used before injections, whether imaging is necessary for block performance, the diagnostic and prognostic value of medial branch blocks (MBB) and intra-articular (IA) injections, the effects of sedation and injectate volume on validity, whether facet blocks have therapeutic value, what the ideal cut-off value is for a prognostic block, how many blocks should be performed before RFA, how electrodes should be oriented, the evidence for larger lesions, whether stimulation should be used before RFA, ways to mitigate complications, if different standards should be applied to clinical practice and clinical trials and the evidence for repeating RFA (see table 12 for summary).
CONCLUSIONS
Lumbar medial branch RFA may provide benefit to well-selected individuals, with MBB being more predictive than IA injections. More stringent selection criteria are likely to improve denervation outcomes, but at the expense of more false-negatives. Clinical trials should be tailored based on objectives, and selection criteria for some may be more stringent than what is ideal in clinical practice.
Topics: Arthralgia; Consensus; Humans; Injections, Intra-Articular; Low Back Pain; Zygapophyseal Joint
PubMed: 32245841
DOI: 10.1136/rapm-2019-101243 -
The Spine Journal : Official Journal of... Jun 2022Cervical facet joints are a common cause of chronic neck pain. Radiofrequency neurotomy is a validated treatment technique for cervical facet joint pain, but the role of...
BACKGROUND CONTEXT
Cervical facet joints are a common cause of chronic neck pain. Radiofrequency neurotomy is a validated treatment technique for cervical facet joint pain, but the role of intra-articular injections is less clear. Ultrasound guidance can be used to inject the cervical facet joints. Given that the accuracy of any injection technique is likely to affect treatment outcomes, it would be useful to know the accuracy of ultrasound-guided cervical facet joint injections.
PURPOSE
The primary purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy of ultrasound-guided cervical facet joint injections using a lateral technique. The secondary purpose was to describe the technique.
STUDY DESIGN/SETTING
Cohort study of ultrasound-guided cervical facet joint injections performed by an experienced spine and ultrasound interventionist, as assessed by contrast dye arthrography at a community interventional spine practice.
PATIENT SAMPLE
Sixty joints in 36 patients with facet mediated pain.
OUTCOME MEASURES
Accuracy of ultrasound-guided injections as determined by the percent of fluoroscopic contrast dye patterns interpreted to be intra-articular by the operator and an independent imaging specialist. Confidence intervals were determined using binomial "exact" and normal approximation to the binomial calculations.
METHODS
Ultrasound using a long-axis or in-plane approach was used to guide a needle into a facet joint, followed by injection of contrast dye and a lateral fluoroscopic image. The dye pattern was interpreted by the operator. Depending on the pattern, local anesthetic and corticosteroid were injected. The patient was asked whether their neck pain had resolved. If not resolved, another joint was selected and the process was repeated. At the end of the study, all of the contrast patterns were interpreted independently by the imaging specialist. Funding was through a 501(c)(3) foundation without any commercial or sponsorship interests.
RESULTS
The accuracy of ultrasound-guided cervical facet joint injections using the lateral technique ranged from 92% to 98% depending on the criteria used to confirm an intra-articular contrast pattern (95% CI: 0.82-0.97 to 0.91-1.0, and 0.85-0.99 to 0.95-1.00). The distribution of injections was C2-3 (22%), C3-4 (40%), C4-5 (33%) and C5-6 (5%).
CONCLUSIONS
Cervical facet joint injections can be performed with a high degree of accuracy using a lateral ultrasound-guided technique. As with fluoroscopy-guided cervical facet joint injections, the technique requires a careful approach and a high degree of skill.
Topics: Cohort Studies; Contrast Media; Humans; Injections, Intra-Articular; Neck Pain; Ultrasonography, Interventional; Zygapophyseal Joint
PubMed: 35093557
DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2022.01.011 -
Journal of Biomechanics Sep 2022Facet joint arthrosis causes pain in approximately 7 % of the U.S. population, but current treatments are palliative. The objective of this study was to elucidate...
Facet joint arthrosis causes pain in approximately 7 % of the U.S. population, but current treatments are palliative. The objective of this study was to elucidate structure-function relationships and aid in the development of future treatments for the facet joint. This study characterized the articular surfaces of cervical, thoracic, and lumbar facet cartilage from skeletally mature (18-24 mo) Yucatan minipigs. The minipig was selected as the animal model because it is recognized by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) as a translationally relevant model for spine-related indications. It was found that the thoracic facets had a ∼2 times higher aspect ratio than lumbar and cervical facets. Lumbar facets had 6.9-9.6 times higher % depth than the cervical and thoracic facets. Aggregate modulus values ranged from 135 to 262 kPa, much lower than reported aggregate modulus in the human knee (reported to be 530-701 kPa). The tensile Young's modulus values ranged from 6.7 to 20.3 MPa, with the lumbar superior facet being 304 % and 286 % higher than the cervical inferior and thoracic superior facets, respectively. Moreover, 3D reconstructions of entire vertebral segments were generated. The results of this study imply that structure-function relationships in the facet cartilage are different from other joint cartilages because biochemical properties are analogous to other articular cartilage sources whereas mechanical properties are not. By providing functional properties and a 3D database of minipig facet geometries, this work may supply design criteria for future facet tissue engineering efforts.
Topics: Animals; Biomechanical Phenomena; Cartilage, Articular; Elastic Modulus; Humans; Lumbar Vertebrae; Spine; Swine; Swine, Miniature; Zygapophyseal Joint
PubMed: 35933954
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2022.111238 -
Neurology India 2022Controversy exists in the literature about whether facet effusions and other degeneration parameters are associated with instability. (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
BACKGROUND
Controversy exists in the literature about whether facet effusions and other degeneration parameters are associated with instability.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the association between facet effusions and other lumbar degeneration parameters and segmental instability.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
In this study, 207 L4-L5 and L5-S1 levels in 104 patients were assessed. We divided the spinal levels into two groups: the small facet effusions (SFE) group in whom facet effusions were <1.5 mm or non-effusions were found, and the large facet effusions (LFE) group in whom they were ≥1.5 mm. The association between other degeneration parameters and instability was also assessed, such as disc degeneration, Modic changes (MC), spondylolisthesis, facet orientation and tropism, facet subchondral sclerosis, and facet cartilage degeneration. Furthermore, we subdivided the levels into subgroups to evaluate the association of LFE and instability within each one.
RESULTS
The main analysis comparing the presence of instability in SFE and LFE groups showed a non-statistically significant association between LFE and instability. The presence of MC type 1 and the existence of L4-L5 spondylolisthesis had a statistically significant association with instability. In the subset of 43 levels with L4-L5 degenerative spondylolisthesis, the presence of LFE and the existence of MC type 1 reached a significant association with instability.
CONCLUSION
The presence of LFE and/or MC type 1 may act as red flags in patients with L4-L5 degenerative spondylolisthesis to suspect segmental instability.
Topics: Humans; Exudates and Transudates; Intervertebral Disc Degeneration; Joint Instability; Lumbar Vertebrae; Retrospective Studies; Spondylolisthesis; Zygapophyseal Joint
PubMed: 36412373
DOI: 10.4103/0028-3886.360912