Suppr超能文献

骶髂关节干预措施诊断准确性与治疗有效性的系统评价

Systematic Review of the Diagnostic Accuracy and Therapeutic Effectiveness of Sacroiliac Joint Interventions.

作者信息

Simopoulos Thomas T, Manchikanti Laxmaiah, Gupta Sanjeeva, Aydin Steve M, Kim Chong Hwan, Solanki Daneshvari, Nampiaparampil Devi E, Singh Vijay, Staats Peter S, Hirsch Joshua A

机构信息

Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.

Pain Management Center of Paducah, Paducah, KY, and University of Louisville, Louisville, KY.

出版信息

Pain Physician. 2015 Sep-Oct;18(5):E713-56.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The sacroiliac joint is well known as a cause of low back and lower extremity pain. Prevalence estimates are 10% to 25% in patients with persistent axial low back pain without disc herniation, discogenic pain, or radiculitis based on multiple diagnostic studies and systematic reviews. However, at present there are no definitive management options for treating sacroiliac joint pain.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and therapeutic effectiveness of sacroiliac joint interventions.

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic review of the diagnostic accuracy and therapeutic effectiveness of sacroiliac joint interventions.

METHODS

The available literature on diagnostic and therapeutic sacroiliac joint interventions was reviewed. The quality assessment criteria utilized were the Quality Appraisal of Reliability Studies (QAREL) checklist for diagnostic accuracy studies, Cochrane review criteria to assess sources of risk of bias, and Interventional Pain Management Techniques-Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment (IPM-QRB) criteria for randomized therapeutic trials and Interventional Pain Management Techniques-Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment for Nonrandomized Studies (IPM-QRBNR) for observational therapeutic assessments. The level of evidence was based on a best evidence synthesis with modified grading of qualitative evidence from Level I to Level V. Data sources included relevant literature published from 1966 through March 2015 that were identified through searches of PubMed and EMBASE, manual searches of the bibliographies of known primary and review articles, and all other sources.

OUTCOME MEASURES

For the diagnostic accuracy assessment, and for the therapeutic modalities, the primary outcome measure of pain relief and improvement in functional status were utilized.

RESULTS

A total of 11 diagnostic accuracy studies and 14 therapeutic studies were included. The evidence for diagnostic accuracy is Level II for dual diagnostic blocks with at least 70% pain relief as the criterion standard and Level III evidence for single diagnostic blocks with at least 75% pain relief as the criterion standard. The evidence for cooled radiofrequency neurotomy in managing sacroiliac joint pain is Level II to III. The evidence for conventional radiofrequency neurotomy, intraarticular steroid injections, and periarticular injections with steroids or botulinum toxin is limited: Level III or IV.

LIMITATIONS

The limitations of this systematic review include inconsistencies in diagnostic accuracy studies with a paucity of high quality, replicative, and consistent literature. The limitations for therapeutic interventions include variations in technique, variable diagnostic standards for inclusion criteria, and variable results.

CONCLUSION

The evidence for the accuracy of diagnostic and therapeutic effectiveness of sacroiliac joint interventions varied from Level II to Level IV.

摘要

背景

骶髂关节是导致腰背部和下肢疼痛的常见原因。基于多项诊断研究和系统评价,在无椎间盘突出、椎间盘源性疼痛或神经根炎的持续性轴性腰背痛患者中,骶髂关节疼痛的患病率估计为10%至25%。然而,目前对于治疗骶髂关节疼痛尚无明确的管理方案。

目的

评估骶髂关节干预措施的诊断准确性和治疗效果。

研究设计

对骶髂关节干预措施的诊断准确性和治疗效果进行系统评价。

方法

对现有的关于骶髂关节诊断和治疗干预措施的文献进行综述。所采用的质量评估标准包括用于诊断准确性研究的可靠性研究质量评估(QAREL)清单、用于评估偏倚风险来源的Cochrane综述标准,以及用于随机治疗试验的介入性疼痛管理技术-可靠性和偏倚风险评估质量评估(IPM-QRB)标准和用于观察性治疗评估的介入性疼痛管理技术-非随机研究的可靠性和偏倚风险评估质量评估(IPM-QRBNR)标准。证据水平基于最佳证据综合,并对定性证据进行从I级到V级的改良分级。数据来源包括通过检索PubMed和EMBASE、手动检索已知的主要和综述文章的参考文献以及所有其他来源确定的1966年至2015年3月发表的相关文献。

观察指标

对于诊断准确性评估以及治疗方式,采用疼痛缓解和功能状态改善作为主要观察指标。

结果

共纳入11项诊断准确性研究和14项治疗研究。以至少70%的疼痛缓解为标准的双重诊断阻滞的诊断准确性证据为II级,以至少75%的疼痛缓解为标准的单一诊断阻滞的证据为III级。冷却射频神经切断术治疗骶髂关节疼痛的证据为II级至III级。传统射频神经切断术、关节内注射类固醇以及关节周围注射类固醇或肉毒杆菌毒素的证据有限:III级或IV级。

局限性

本系统评价的局限性包括诊断准确性研究存在不一致性,高质量、可重复且一致的文献匮乏。治疗干预的局限性包括技术差异、纳入标准的诊断标准不同以及结果各异。

结论

骶髂关节干预措施的诊断准确性和治疗效果的证据水平从II级到IV级不等。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验