Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35592816›Full record

ArticleJournal of pain research2022

Salvage of Failed Lateral Sacroiliac Joint Fusion with a Novel Posterior Sacroiliac Fusion Device: Diagnostic Approach, Surgical Technique, and Multicenter Case Series.

Dawood Sayed, Nasir Khatri, Adam Rupp, Christopher Bovinet, Nomen Azeem, Sean Li, Youssef Josephson, Jason Pope

Open access · goldAbstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pain research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. The Bedrock technique with triangular titanium rods for spinopelvic fixation and sacroiliac joint fusion: is there a learning curve?European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Dawood SayedDepartment of Anesthesiology, University of Kansas, Kansas City, KS, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8867-2140
Nasir KhatriDepartment of Anesthesiology, University of Kansas, Kansas City, KS, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4958-2294
Adam RuppDepartment of Anesthesiology, University of Kansas, Kansas City, KS, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5982-0113
Christopher BovinetThe Spine Center of Southeast Georgia, Brunswick, GA, USA.
Nomen AzeemFlorida Spine & Pain Specialists, Riverview, FL, USA.
Sean LiPremier Pain Centers, Shrewsbury, NJ, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0492-1179
Youssef JosephsonNational Spine & Pain Centers, Voorhees Township, NJ, USA.
Jason PopeEvolve Restorative Center, Santa Rosa, CA, USA.
University of Kansas · USEvolve Restorative Center · USInternational Spine, Pain & Performance · USPain Management Centers Of America · USThe Spine Institute · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Studies have found that up to one-third of patients with LBP have sacroiliac joint (SIJ) dysfunction as a contributing cause. Historically, the management of SIJ dysfunction has been plagued by ineffectiveness or significant morbidity. In 2008, minimally invasive lateral SIJ fusion was developed. While this procedure is a safe and effective treatment, there is still a significant proportion of patients who will not experience therapeutic success. There is a paucity of data in the literature regarding the management of these patients. Recently, a novel posterior sacroiliac joint fusion device has been developed which minimizes complications compared to lateral approaches and may serve to salvage therapeutic failures in this patient population. Objective: Determine the efficacy and feasibility of a posterior SIJ fusion device as a salvage technique in patients who have not experienced therapeutic success following lateral SIJ fusion. Design: Multi-center retrospective observational study. Methods: Patients who had previously undergone lateral SIJ fusion and had persistent LBP were evaluated and diagnosed to have persistent primary SIJ pathology. All patients underwent posterior SIJ fusion utilizing a machined allograft transfixing sacroiliac fusion device. Demographic data and patient reported pain scores were collected. Results: A total of 7 patients who had undergone lateral SIJ fusion were included in the study and underwent posterior SIJ fusion. The mean patient reported pain improvement following posterior fusion was 80% with an average follow-up time of 10 months. Median morphine milliequivalents were 20 pre-procedure and 0 post-procedure. Conclusion: We were able to show significant reductions in pain scores and opioid consumption, which suggests that minimally invasive posterior SIJ utilizing a novel implant and technique may be a viable treatment option to salvage pain relief in this patient population. Further, the favorable safety profile of this posterior technique uniquely positions it to be an appropriate first-line surgical therapy.

Indexed as

lateral SIJ fusionlow back painposterior SIJ fusionsacroiliac joint painsalvage

Identifiers

PMID35592816
PMCPMC9112175
OpenAlexW4280624299

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.