ArticleAsian spine journal2017
Patient Reported Outcomes from Sacroiliac Joint Fusion.
Article in Asian spine journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Minimally invasive lateral, posterior, and posterolateral sacroiliac joint fusion for low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The Journal of international medical research · 2025Pooled it
- Interventional treatments for low back pain due to sacroiliac joint dysfunction: a systematic review of the literature.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2024Pooled it
- Incidence, diagnosis and management of sacroiliitis after spinal surgery: a systematic review of the literature.Musculoskeletal surgery · 2020Pooled it
- Sacroiliac joint fusion: incidence, timing, and risk factors for contralateral fusion.North American Spine Society journal · 2025Article
- An Algorithmic Overview of Advanced Pain Therapies: A Narrative Review.Current pain and headache reports · 2025Review
- Clinical outcome measures following lateral versus posterior sacroiliac joint fusion: Systematic review and meta-analysis.Brain & spine · 2025Article
- American Society of Pain and Neuroscience Best Practice (ASPN) Guideline for the Treatment of Sacroiliac Disorders.Journal of pain research · 2024Review
- Minimally invasive sacroiliac fusion: current insights and a comprehensive literature review.Turkish journal of medical sciences · 2024Review
- Minimally Invasive SI Joint Fusion Procedures for Chronic SI Joint Pain: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Safety and Efficacy.International journal of spine surgery · 2023Article
- Double-center observational study of minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion for sacroiliac joint dysfunction: one-year results.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2022Observational
- Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion vs Conservative Management in Patients With Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of spine surgery · 2022Article
- Analysis of Fracture Patterns and Characteristics in Sacral Insufficiency Fracture: Do Sacral Fractures Occur in Patients Who Had Previous Lumbosacral Fusion Insufficiency Fractures or Stress Fractures?Asian spine journal · 2021Article
- Review
- Pain Relief Salvage with a Novel Minimally Invasive Posterior Sacroiliac Joint Fusion Device in Patients with Previously Implanted Pain Devices and Therapies.Journal of pain research · 2021Article
- International Society for the Advancement of Spine Surgery Policy 2020 Update-Minimally Invasive Surgical Sacroiliac Joint Fusion (for Chronic Sacroiliac Joint Pain): Coverage Indications, Limitations, and Medical Necessity.International journal of spine surgery · 2020Article
- Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion: The Current Evidence.International journal of spine surgery · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designRetrospective, case series. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to determine morbidity, complications, and patient reported outcomes from minimally invasive sacroiliac joint (SIJ) fusion. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Lumbar back pain emanating from the SIJ can be surgically treated via a percutaneous approach in the appropriately selected patient with minimal morbidity and acceptable functional outcomes.
methodsPatients diagnosed by >2 physical examination maneuvers and subjective relief from a computed tomography-guided lidocaine-bupivacaine-steroid injection underwent SIJ fusion after failing conservative management with a combination of oral anti-inflammatory medications, physical therapy, and pelvic belt stabilization. Perioperative data collected include estimated blood loss (EBL) and operative time. Oswestry disability index, 12-item short form health survey (SF-12), visual analogue score, and functional status were analyzed. All complications were noted.
resultsThe study cohort of 45 cases (69% female) achieved postoperative survey follow-up at 9.9 and 32.3 months. SF-12 physical component summary statistically improved while all other scores were equivalent. Mean EBL and operative time were 22 mL and 36 minutes, respectively. Initial survey showed that 64% of patients discontinued narcotics (29/45), 71% do not use an assistive device (32/45), and 15.6% do not work due to pain (7/45). 73% of patients stated they would have the surgery again (33/45). For the second survey, 65% of patients discontinued narcotics (26/40), 70% did not use an assistive device (28/40), and 17.5% did not work due to pain (7/40). A history of thoracolumbar instrumentation (16/45) did not significantly affect outcomes. Three complications described by screw malposition with neurologic deficit (6.7%) were treated with screw repositioning (1 case) and removal of a single superior implant (2 cases) with time to revision of 2.2 months. All three ultimately had resolution of radicular pain.
conclusionsPercutaneous SIJ fusion offers minimal morbidity and acceptable functional outcomes. While women and those with a prior history of lumbar instrumentation may be at increased risk of having SIJ dysfunction requiring surgical intervention, it was not found to affect postoperative functional outcomes when compared to the non-instrumented group.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.