小面关节阻滞与内侧分支阻滞在脊柱疼痛管理中的有效性:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 3.6 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Neurospine Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2025-06-30 DOI:10.14245/ns.2550384.192
Sung Hyeon Noh, Kyoung-Tae Kim, Dong Ah Shin, Je Hwi Yun, Pyung Goo Cho, Sang Hyun Kim
{"title":"小面关节阻滞与内侧分支阻滞在脊柱疼痛管理中的有效性:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Sung Hyeon Noh, Kyoung-Tae Kim, Dong Ah Shin, Je Hwi Yun, Pyung Goo Cho, Sang Hyun Kim","doi":"10.14245/ns.2550384.192","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Facet joint injections (FJIs) and medial branch blocks (MBBs) are commonly used interventions for chronic spinal pain, but their comparative effectiveness remains unclear. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the pain relief, functional improvement, complications, and patient satisfaction associated with FJI and MBB.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies were conducted. Primary outcomes included pain relief (numerical rating scale) and functional improvement (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]/Neck Disability Index). Secondary outcomes assessed adverse effects and patient satisfaction. The differences in characteristics between patients who were readmitted and those who were not were identified and analyzed using the Review Manager software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>FJI resulted in lower pain and ODI scores compared to MBB, but the differences were not statistically significant. However, patient satisfaction was significantly higher in the FJI group (odds ratio, 1.81; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-3.24; p=0.04). Additionally, FJI had fewer adverse effects than MBB.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both FJI and MBB are effective for chronic spinal pain, but FJI may be preferred for patients seeking immediate pain relief with fewer complications. Further high-quality studies are needed to refine treatment guidelines.</p>","PeriodicalId":19269,"journal":{"name":"Neurospine","volume":"22 2","pages":"441-450"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12242727/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effectiveness of a Facet Joint Block Versus a Medial Branch Block in Spinal Pain Management: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Sung Hyeon Noh, Kyoung-Tae Kim, Dong Ah Shin, Je Hwi Yun, Pyung Goo Cho, Sang Hyun Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.14245/ns.2550384.192\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Facet joint injections (FJIs) and medial branch blocks (MBBs) are commonly used interventions for chronic spinal pain, but their comparative effectiveness remains unclear. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the pain relief, functional improvement, complications, and patient satisfaction associated with FJI and MBB.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies were conducted. Primary outcomes included pain relief (numerical rating scale) and functional improvement (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]/Neck Disability Index). Secondary outcomes assessed adverse effects and patient satisfaction. The differences in characteristics between patients who were readmitted and those who were not were identified and analyzed using the Review Manager software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>FJI resulted in lower pain and ODI scores compared to MBB, but the differences were not statistically significant. However, patient satisfaction was significantly higher in the FJI group (odds ratio, 1.81; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-3.24; p=0.04). Additionally, FJI had fewer adverse effects than MBB.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both FJI and MBB are effective for chronic spinal pain, but FJI may be preferred for patients seeking immediate pain relief with fewer complications. Further high-quality studies are needed to refine treatment guidelines.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19269,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurospine\",\"volume\":\"22 2\",\"pages\":\"441-450\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12242727/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurospine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14245/ns.2550384.192\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/6/30 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurospine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14245/ns.2550384.192","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:关节突关节注射(FJIs)和内侧分支阻滞(MBBs)是治疗慢性脊柱疼痛的常用干预措施,但其比较效果尚不清楚。本荟萃分析旨在比较FJI和MBB相关的疼痛缓解、功能改善、并发症和患者满意度。方法:对随机对照试验和观察性研究进行系统评价和荟萃分析。主要结局包括疼痛缓解(数值评定量表)和功能改善(Oswestry残疾指数[ODI]/颈部残疾指数)。次要结局评估不良反应和患者满意度。使用Review Manager软件识别和分析再入院患者和未入院患者之间的特征差异。结果:与MBB相比,FJI的疼痛和ODI评分较低,但差异无统计学意义。然而,FJI组患者满意度显著高于FJI组(优势比,1.81;95%置信区间为1.02-3.24;p = 0.04)。此外,FJI的不良反应比MBB少。结论:FJI和MBB对慢性脊柱疼痛均有效,但FJI可能更适合那些寻求即刻疼痛缓解且并发症少的患者。需要进一步的高质量研究来完善治疗指南。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Effectiveness of a Facet Joint Block Versus a Medial Branch Block in Spinal Pain Management: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Effectiveness of a Facet Joint Block Versus a Medial Branch Block in Spinal Pain Management: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Effectiveness of a Facet Joint Block Versus a Medial Branch Block in Spinal Pain Management: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Effectiveness of a Facet Joint Block Versus a Medial Branch Block in Spinal Pain Management: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Objective: Facet joint injections (FJIs) and medial branch blocks (MBBs) are commonly used interventions for chronic spinal pain, but their comparative effectiveness remains unclear. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the pain relief, functional improvement, complications, and patient satisfaction associated with FJI and MBB.

Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies were conducted. Primary outcomes included pain relief (numerical rating scale) and functional improvement (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]/Neck Disability Index). Secondary outcomes assessed adverse effects and patient satisfaction. The differences in characteristics between patients who were readmitted and those who were not were identified and analyzed using the Review Manager software.

Results: FJI resulted in lower pain and ODI scores compared to MBB, but the differences were not statistically significant. However, patient satisfaction was significantly higher in the FJI group (odds ratio, 1.81; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-3.24; p=0.04). Additionally, FJI had fewer adverse effects than MBB.

Conclusion: Both FJI and MBB are effective for chronic spinal pain, but FJI may be preferred for patients seeking immediate pain relief with fewer complications. Further high-quality studies are needed to refine treatment guidelines.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Neurospine
Neurospine Multiple-
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
18.80%
发文量
93
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信