ReviewJournal of pain research2024
Radiofrequency vs Steroid Injections for Spinal Facet and Sacroiliac Joint Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Journal of pain research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- An Updated Review of Utilization Patterns of Sacroiliac Joint Interventions in the Fee-for-service (ffs) Medicare Population from 2000 to 2022.Current pain and headache reports · 2026Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Pain management for spinal facet joint (SFJ) and sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain is challenging, often requiring interventions like radiofrequency ablation (RFA) or corticosteroid injections (CI). This study aims to assess and compare the effectiveness of CI and RFA in treating SFJ and SIJ pain. We combine these treatments due to their shared pathophysiology, similar therapeutic interventions, and the necessity for an integrated approach to spinal pain management. Patients and methods: Literature search from PubMed, Scopus, CENTRAL and Google Scholar for published studies upto 31 Results: Our meta-analysis incorporated thirteen studies. Overall, patients, treated with CI had a higher pain intensity score compared to patients treated with RFA (SMD=0.92; 95% CI: 0.19 to 1.65) at 3 months, and at 6 months (SMD=1.53; 95% CI: 0.66 to 2.40) after the treatment. No significant association was reported at 12 months (SMD=1.47; 95% CI: -0.03 to 2.97). Subgroup analysis based on joint types revealed increased pain intensity scores in patients who were treated with CI for SIJ (SMD=1.25; 95% CI: 0.39 to 2.11) and SFJ (SMD=1.33; 95% CI: 0.09 to 2.57) pain. A negative but not significant effect was detected in patients, treated with CI for cervical joint pain (SMD=-0.40; 95% CI: -0.90 to 0.10). Patients treated with CI exhibited higher functional disability score compared to patients treated with RFA at 3 months (SMD=1.28; 95% CI: 0.20 to 2.35) post-treatment. Conclusion: This study suggests that RFA may offer superior pain relief with longer duration compared to steroid injections for spinal facet and sacroiliac joint pain. Decision regarding specific interventions should be individualized and consider patient preferences, clinical context, and potential risks.
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.