Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
PLoS One. 2011;6(11):e27991. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0027991. Epub 2011 Nov 29.
The diagnosis "lumbar facet syndrome" is common and often indicates severe lumbar spine surgery procedures. It is doubtful whether a painful facet joint (FJ) can be identified by a single FJ block. The aim of this study was to clarify the validity of a single and placebo controlled bilateral FJ blocks using local anesthetics. A prospective single blinded triple cross-over study was performed. 60 patients (31 f, 29 m, mean age 53.2 yrs (22-73)) with chronic low back pain (mean pain persistance 31 months, 6 months of conservative treatment without success) admitted to a local orthopaedic department for surgical or conservative therapy of chronic LBP, were included in the study. Effect on pain reduction (10 point rating scale) was measured. The 60 subjects were divided into six groups with three defined sequences of fluoroscopically guided bilateral monosegmental lumbar FJ test injections in "oblique needle" technique: verum-(local anaesthetic-), placebo-(sodium chloride-) and sham-injection. Carry-over and periodic effects were evaluated and a descriptive and statistical analysis regarding the effectiveness, difference and equality of the FJ injections and the different responses was performed. The results show a high rate of non-response, which documents the lack of reliable and valid predictors for a positive response towards FJ blocks. There was a high rate of placebo reactions noted, including subjects who previously or later reacted positively to verum injections. Equivalence was shown among verum vs. placebo and partly vs. sham also. With regard to test validity criteria, a single intraarticular FJ block with local anesthetics is not useful to detect the pain-responsible FJ and therefore is no valid and reliable diagostic tool to specify indication of lumbar spine surgery. Comparative FJ blocks with local anesthetics and placebo-controls have to be interpretated carefully also, because they solely give no proper diagnosis on FJ being main pain generator.
“腰椎小关节综合征”的诊断很常见,通常表明需要进行严重的腰椎手术。单凭一个小关节阻滞(FJ)是否能确定疼痛的 FJ 仍存在疑问。本研究旨在明确使用局部麻醉剂进行单次和安慰剂对照双侧 FJ 阻滞的有效性。进行了一项前瞻性、单盲、三交叉研究。60 名(31 名女性,29 名男性,平均年龄 53.2 岁(22-73))慢性腰痛患者(平均疼痛持续时间 31 个月,6 个月的保守治疗无效)被收入当地骨科部门接受慢性 LBP 的手术或保守治疗,包括在这项研究中。通过 10 分评分量表测量疼痛减轻的效果。60 名受试者分为六组,采用“斜针”技术进行透视引导双侧单节段腰椎 FJ 测试注射:真(局部麻醉剂)-、假(生理盐水)-和假注射。评估了交叉和周期性影响,并对 FJ 注射的有效性、差异和均等性以及不同反应进行了描述性和统计分析。结果显示,无反应率很高,这证明缺乏可靠和有效的 FJ 阻滞阳性反应预测指标。假阳性反应率很高,包括先前或后来对真射剂反应阳性的受试者。真射剂与安慰剂和部分与假射剂之间也表现出等效性。关于测试有效性标准,单次关节内 FJ 阻滞用局部麻醉剂不能用于检测疼痛责任 FJ,因此不是指定腰椎手术适应证的有效和可靠的诊断工具。还必须仔细解释比较 FJ 阻滞用局部麻醉剂和安慰剂对照,因为它们单独不能对 FJ 作为主要疼痛发生器做出适当的诊断。