Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35772982›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2022

Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion vs Conservative Management in Patients With Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Sem M M Hermans, Ruud Droeghaag, Martijn G M Schotanus, Henk van Santbrink, Wouter L W van Hemert, Inez Curfs

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of spine surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Utility of minimally invasive percutaneous arthrodesis of the sacroiliac joint for the treatment of low back pain: 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 · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Sem M M HermansDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center, Heerlen, the Netherlands semhermans@hotmail.com.
Ruud DroeghaagDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center, Heerlen, the Netherlands.
Martijn G M SchotanusDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center, Heerlen, the Netherlands.
Henk van SantbrinkCare and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI) Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Wouter L W van HemertDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center, Heerlen, the Netherlands.
Inez CurfsDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center, Heerlen, the Netherlands.
Maastricht University · NLZuyderland Medisch Centrum · NLUniversity Hospital and Clinics · USUniversity Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe sacroiliac joint (SIJ) is affected in 14% to 22% in individuals presenting with chronic low back or buttock pain. This percentage is even higher in patients who underwent lumbar fusion surgery: 32% to 42%. Currently, there is no standard treatment or surgical indication for SIJ dysfunction. When patients do not respond well to nonsurgical treatment, minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion (MISJF) seems to be a reasonable option. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the current literature on the effectiveness of MISJF compared to conservative management in patients with SIJ dysfunction.

methodsA systematic search of health-care databases was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or prospective and retrospective comparative cohort studies that compared MISJF with conservative management. Primary outcome measures were pain, disability, and patient satisfaction measured by patient-reported outcome measures. Secondary outcomes were adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, financial benefits, and costs.

resultsTwo RCTs and one retrospective cohort study were included comparing MISJF and conservative management with regard to pain and disability outcome, encompassing 388 patients (207 conservative and 181 surgical). In a pooled mean difference analysis, MISJF demonstrated greater reduction in visual analog scale-pain score compared to conservative management: -37.03 points (95%CI [-43.91, -30.15],

conclusionsThis systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that MISJF, using cannulated triangular, titanium implants, is more effective and cost-effective than conservative management in reducing pain and disability in patients with SIJ dysfunction. Further well-powered, independent research is needed to improve the overall evidence. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1:

Indexed as

conservative managementminimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusionsacroiliac jointsacroiliac joint dysfunctionsystematic review and meta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID35772982
PMCPMC9650193
OpenAlexW4283735167

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.