基于路标和透视引导的骶髂关节注射的评估-一个试点系列。

IF 2.1 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Orthopedic Reviews Pub Date : 2025-08-20 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.52965/001c.143090
Jamal Hasoon, Matthew Chung, Cyrus Yazdi, Christopher L Robinson
{"title":"基于路标和透视引导的骶髂关节注射的评估-一个试点系列。","authors":"Jamal Hasoon, Matthew Chung, Cyrus Yazdi, Christopher L Robinson","doi":"10.52965/001c.143090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) dysfunction is a frequently underdiagnosed contributor to chronic low back pain. Although fluoroscopic-guided SIJ injections remain the gold standard for both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes, their availability may be limited by insurance barriers or logistical constraints. In such cases, alternative approaches such as ultrasound-guided or landmark-based injections may offer practical, rapid solutions in outpatient settings. This case series aims to compare outcomes between landmark-based and fluoroscopic-guided SIJ injections in patients presenting with clinical findings suggestive of SIJ-related pain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Ten patients with suspected SIJ-related pain were identified based on a positive Fortin's Finger Test and FABERs examination. Five patients underwent landmark-based SIJ injections, performed by palpating the posterior superior iliac spine (PSIS) and directing the needle slightly inferior to this landmark. The remaining five patients received fluoroscopic-guided SIJ injections using standard imaging protocols. All injections consisted of 2 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine combined with 40 mg of triamcinolone. Pain relief was assessed at a 2-week follow-up using patient-reported percentage improvement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among patients who underwent landmark-based injections, reported pain relief at two weeks was 50%, 40%, 50%, 90%, and 50%, with an average relief of 56%. In contrast, patients receiving fluoroscopic-guided injections reported pain relief of 80%, 50%, 75%, 100%, and 75%, with an average relief of 76%. No procedural complications were reported in either group.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Fluoroscopic-guided SIJ injections were associated with greater and more consistent pain relief at short-term follow-up. However, landmark-based injections provided meaningful clinical benefit in the majority of patients and may serve as a practical option when immediate intervention is needed, particularly when imaging resources are unavailable or delayed due to insurance approval. The absence of complications in either group supports the relative safety of both approaches when performed by trained interventionalists. Notably, we maintain that fluoroscopic-guided injections remain the gold standard and should be utilized to confirm sacroiliac joint pain or when assessing patients for potential advanced interventions.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While fluoroscopic guidance offers superior accuracy and therapeutic efficacy for SIJ injections, landmark-based techniques can be a viable solution in specific clinical scenarios. Fluoroscopic-guided injections remain the gold standard and should be utilized to confirm sacroiliac joint pain or when assessing patients for potential advanced interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":19669,"journal":{"name":"Orthopedic Reviews","volume":"17 ","pages":"143090"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12372924/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of Landmark-Based and Fluoroscopic-Guided Sacroiliac Joint Injections-A Pilot Series.\",\"authors\":\"Jamal Hasoon, Matthew Chung, Cyrus Yazdi, Christopher L Robinson\",\"doi\":\"10.52965/001c.143090\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) dysfunction is a frequently underdiagnosed contributor to chronic low back pain. Although fluoroscopic-guided SIJ injections remain the gold standard for both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes, their availability may be limited by insurance barriers or logistical constraints. In such cases, alternative approaches such as ultrasound-guided or landmark-based injections may offer practical, rapid solutions in outpatient settings. This case series aims to compare outcomes between landmark-based and fluoroscopic-guided SIJ injections in patients presenting with clinical findings suggestive of SIJ-related pain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Ten patients with suspected SIJ-related pain were identified based on a positive Fortin's Finger Test and FABERs examination. Five patients underwent landmark-based SIJ injections, performed by palpating the posterior superior iliac spine (PSIS) and directing the needle slightly inferior to this landmark. The remaining five patients received fluoroscopic-guided SIJ injections using standard imaging protocols. All injections consisted of 2 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine combined with 40 mg of triamcinolone. Pain relief was assessed at a 2-week follow-up using patient-reported percentage improvement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among patients who underwent landmark-based injections, reported pain relief at two weeks was 50%, 40%, 50%, 90%, and 50%, with an average relief of 56%. In contrast, patients receiving fluoroscopic-guided injections reported pain relief of 80%, 50%, 75%, 100%, and 75%, with an average relief of 76%. No procedural complications were reported in either group.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Fluoroscopic-guided SIJ injections were associated with greater and more consistent pain relief at short-term follow-up. However, landmark-based injections provided meaningful clinical benefit in the majority of patients and may serve as a practical option when immediate intervention is needed, particularly when imaging resources are unavailable or delayed due to insurance approval. The absence of complications in either group supports the relative safety of both approaches when performed by trained interventionalists. Notably, we maintain that fluoroscopic-guided injections remain the gold standard and should be utilized to confirm sacroiliac joint pain or when assessing patients for potential advanced interventions.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While fluoroscopic guidance offers superior accuracy and therapeutic efficacy for SIJ injections, landmark-based techniques can be a viable solution in specific clinical scenarios. Fluoroscopic-guided injections remain the gold standard and should be utilized to confirm sacroiliac joint pain or when assessing patients for potential advanced interventions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19669,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Orthopedic Reviews\",\"volume\":\"17 \",\"pages\":\"143090\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12372924/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Orthopedic Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.52965/001c.143090\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopedic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52965/001c.143090","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:骶髂关节(SIJ)功能障碍是慢性腰痛的一个经常被误诊的因素。虽然透视引导下的SIJ注射仍然是诊断和治疗目的的金标准,但其可用性可能受到保险障碍或后勤限制的限制。在这种情况下,超声引导或地标性注射等替代方法可能在门诊环境中提供实用、快速的解决方案。本病例系列旨在比较地标性和透视引导下SIJ注射对临床表现提示SIJ相关疼痛的患者的结果。方法:对10例疑似sij相关性疼痛患者进行Fortin’s Finger Test和FABERs检查。5例患者接受了基于路标的SIJ注射,通过触诊髂后上棘(PSIS)并将针指向该路标略下进行。其余5例患者使用标准成像方案接受透视引导下的SIJ注射。所有注射均为0.25%布比卡因2ml联合曲安奈德40 mg。在2周的随访中使用患者报告的改善百分比评估疼痛缓解。结果:在接受地标性注射的患者中,两周疼痛缓解分别为50%、40%、50%、90%和50%,平均缓解56%。相比之下,接受透视引导注射的患者疼痛缓解率分别为80%、50%、75%、100%和75%,平均缓解率为76%。两组均无手术并发症。讨论:在短期随访中,透视引导下的SIJ注射与更大、更一致的疼痛缓解有关。然而,地标性注射为大多数患者提供了有意义的临床益处,当需要立即干预时,特别是当成像资源不可用或因保险批准而延迟时,可能作为一种实用的选择。两组均无并发症,这说明两种方法在由训练有素的介入医师实施时相对安全。值得注意的是,我们认为透视引导下的注射仍然是金标准,应该用于确认骶髂关节疼痛或评估患者潜在的高级干预措施。结论:虽然透视引导为SIJ注射提供了优越的准确性和治疗效果,但在特定的临床情况下,基于地标的技术可能是一种可行的解决方案。透视引导下的注射仍然是金标准,应用于确认骶髂关节疼痛或评估患者是否需要进行潜在的高级干预。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluation of Landmark-Based and Fluoroscopic-Guided Sacroiliac Joint Injections-A Pilot Series.

Background: Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) dysfunction is a frequently underdiagnosed contributor to chronic low back pain. Although fluoroscopic-guided SIJ injections remain the gold standard for both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes, their availability may be limited by insurance barriers or logistical constraints. In such cases, alternative approaches such as ultrasound-guided or landmark-based injections may offer practical, rapid solutions in outpatient settings. This case series aims to compare outcomes between landmark-based and fluoroscopic-guided SIJ injections in patients presenting with clinical findings suggestive of SIJ-related pain.

Methods: Ten patients with suspected SIJ-related pain were identified based on a positive Fortin's Finger Test and FABERs examination. Five patients underwent landmark-based SIJ injections, performed by palpating the posterior superior iliac spine (PSIS) and directing the needle slightly inferior to this landmark. The remaining five patients received fluoroscopic-guided SIJ injections using standard imaging protocols. All injections consisted of 2 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine combined with 40 mg of triamcinolone. Pain relief was assessed at a 2-week follow-up using patient-reported percentage improvement.

Results: Among patients who underwent landmark-based injections, reported pain relief at two weeks was 50%, 40%, 50%, 90%, and 50%, with an average relief of 56%. In contrast, patients receiving fluoroscopic-guided injections reported pain relief of 80%, 50%, 75%, 100%, and 75%, with an average relief of 76%. No procedural complications were reported in either group.

Discussion: Fluoroscopic-guided SIJ injections were associated with greater and more consistent pain relief at short-term follow-up. However, landmark-based injections provided meaningful clinical benefit in the majority of patients and may serve as a practical option when immediate intervention is needed, particularly when imaging resources are unavailable or delayed due to insurance approval. The absence of complications in either group supports the relative safety of both approaches when performed by trained interventionalists. Notably, we maintain that fluoroscopic-guided injections remain the gold standard and should be utilized to confirm sacroiliac joint pain or when assessing patients for potential advanced interventions.

Conclusion: While fluoroscopic guidance offers superior accuracy and therapeutic efficacy for SIJ injections, landmark-based techniques can be a viable solution in specific clinical scenarios. Fluoroscopic-guided injections remain the gold standard and should be utilized to confirm sacroiliac joint pain or when assessing patients for potential advanced interventions.

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
Orthopedic Reviews
Orthopedic Reviews ORTHOPEDICS-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
4.80%
发文量
122
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: Orthopedic Reviews is an Open Access, online-only, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles concerned with any aspect of orthopedics, as well as diagnosis and treatment, trauma, surgical procedures, arthroscopy, sports medicine, rehabilitation, pediatric and geriatric orthopedics. All bone-related molecular and cell biology, genetics, pathophysiology and epidemiology papers are also welcome. The journal publishes original articles, brief reports, reviews and case reports of general interest.
×
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