1-Year Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial of Conservative Management vs. Minimally Invasive Surgical Treatment for Sacroiliac Joint Pain
- PMID: 28934785
1-Year Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial of Conservative Management vs. Minimally Invasive Surgical Treatment for Sacroiliac Joint Pain
Abstract
Background: Low back pain (LBP) emanating from the sacroiliac joint (SIJ) is a common finding. Devices to fuse the SIJ are now commercially available, but high-quality evidence supporting their effectiveness is limited.
Objectives: To compare the safety and effectiveness of conservative management (CM) to minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion (SIJF) in patients with chronic LBP originating from the SIJ.
Study design: Prospective, multicenter randomized controlled trial.
Setting: One hundred three adults in spine clinics with chronic LBP originating from the SIJ.
Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to CM (n = 51) or SIJF using triangular titanium implants (n = 52). CM consisted of optimization of medical therapy, individualized physiotherapy, and adequate information and reassurance as part of a multifactorial treatment. The primary outcome was the difference in change in self-rated LBP at 6 months using a 0 - 100 visual analog scale (VAS). Other effectiveness and safety endpoints, including leg pain, disability using Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), quality of life using EQ-5D, and SIJ function using active straight leg raise test (ASLR), were assessed up to 12 months.
Results: At 12 months, mean LBP improved by 41.6 VAS points in the SIJF group vs. 14.0 points in the CM group (treatment difference of 27.6 points, P < 0.0001). Mean ODI improved by 25.0 points in the SIJF group vs. 8.7 points in the CM group (P < 0.0001). Mean improvements in leg pain and EQ-5D scores were large after SIJF and superior to those after CM. CM patients were allowed to crossover to SIJF after 6 months. Patients who crossed to surgical treatment had no pre-crossover improvement in pain and ODI scores; after crossover, improvements were as large as those originally assigned to SIJF. One case of postoperative nerve impingement occurred in the surgical group. Two SIJF patients had recurrent pain attributed to possible device loosening and one had postoperative hematoma. In the CM group, one crossover surgery patient had recurrent pain requiring a revision surgery.
Limitations: The primary limitation was lack of blinding and the subjective nature of self-assessed outcomes.
Conclusions: For patients with chronic LBP originating from the SIJ, minimally invasive SIJF with triangular titanium implants was safe and more effective than CM in relieving pain, reducing disability, and improving patient function and quality of life. Our findings will help to inform decisions regarding its use as a treatment option in this patient population.Key words: Sacroiliac joint dysfunction, pelvic girdle pain, randomized controlled trial, quality of life, spine implants.
Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01741025.
Similar articles
-
Six-month outcomes from a randomized controlled trial of minimally invasive SI joint fusion with triangular titanium implants vs conservative management.Eur Spine J. 2017 Mar;26(3):708-719. doi: 10.1007/s00586-016-4599-9. Epub 2016 May 14. Eur Spine J. 2017. PMID: 27179664 Clinical Trial.
-
Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion, Radiofrequency Denervation, and Conservative Management for Sacroiliac Joint Pain: 6-Year Comparative Case Series.Neurosurgery. 2018 Jan 1;82(1):48-55. doi: 10.1093/neuros/nyx185. Neurosurgery. 2018. PMID: 28431026
-
Two-Year Outcomes from a Randomized Controlled Trial of Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion vs. Non-Surgical Management for Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction.Int J Spine Surg. 2016 Aug 23;10:28. doi: 10.14444/3028. eCollection 2016. Int J Spine Surg. 2016. PMID: 27652199 Free PMC article.
-
The efficacy of primary sacroiliac joint fusion for low back pain caused by sacroiliac joint pathology: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Eur Spine J. 2022 Oct;31(10):2461-2472. doi: 10.1007/s00586-022-07291-y. Epub 2022 Jun 29. Eur Spine J. 2022. PMID: 35768617
-
[Minimally invasive arthrodesis of the sacroiliac joint (SIJ)].Oper Orthop Traumatol. 2022 Apr;34(2):98-108. doi: 10.1007/s00064-021-00738-3. Epub 2021 Oct 18. Oper Orthop Traumatol. 2022. PMID: 34661704 Review. German.
Cited by
-
Safety, Efficacy, and Durability of Outcomes: Results from SECURE: A Single Arm, Multicenter, Prospective, Clinical Study on a Minimally Invasive Posterior Sacroiliac Fusion Allograft Implant.J Pain Res. 2024 Mar 20;17:1209-1222. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S458334. eCollection 2024. J Pain Res. 2024. PMID: 38524688 Free PMC article.
-
The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) Evidence-Based Clinical Guideline of Interventional Treatments for Low Back Pain.J Pain Res. 2022 Dec 6;15:3729-3832. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S386879. eCollection 2022. J Pain Res. 2022. PMID: 36510616 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Comparative Efficacy of Clinical Interventions for Sacroiliac Joint Pain: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis With Preliminary Design of Treatment Algorithm.Neurospine. 2023 Sep;20(3):997-1010. doi: 10.14245/ns.2346586.293. Epub 2023 Sep 30. Neurospine. 2023. PMID: 37798994 Free PMC article.
-
Safety and Preliminary Effectiveness of Lateral Transiliac Sacroiliac Joint Fusion by Interventional Pain Physicians: A Retrospective Analysis.J Pain Res. 2024 Jun 17;17:2147-2153. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S462072. eCollection 2024. J Pain Res. 2024. PMID: 38910592 Free PMC article.
-
Clinical Outcomes Following Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion With Decortication: The EVoluSIon Clinical Study.Int J Spine Surg. 2022 Feb;16(1):168-175. doi: 10.14444/8185. Epub 2022 Feb 25. Int J Spine Surg. 2022. PMID: 35217586 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Associated data
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous