ArticleInterventional pain medicine2024
Optimal caudal needle angulation for lumbar medial branch denervation: A 3D cadaveric and clinical imaging comparison study.
Article in Interventional pain medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A pilot morphometric analysis of lumbar vertebrae to identify fluoroscopic biomarkers.Interventional pain medicine · 2026Article
- Lumbar facet joint denervation targeting the medial branch in the sub-mammillary fossa: An anatomical optimization study.Interventional pain medicine · 2025Article
- Lumbar Facet Joint Disease: What, Why, and When?Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Lumbar medial branch (MB) radiofrequency ablation is a common intervention to treat facetogenic low back pain. The consensus among spine pain interventionalists is that capturing a greater length of the MB correlates with a longer duration of pain relief. Therefore, there has been interest in defining optimal needle angles to achieve parallel cannula placement. Presently, there is inconsistency regarding the optimal caudal needle angles. Objectives: The objectives of this study were to: 1) use a dissection-based 3D modelling methodology to quantify optimal caudal needle angles from cadaveric models; and 2) compare optimal cadaver-derived caudal needle angles with real-world patient-derived needle angles. Methods: Eighteen formalin embalmed lumbosacral spine specimens were dissected, digitized, and modelled in 3D. Virtual needles were simulated and placed parallel with the L1-L5 MBs. Cadaver-derived caudal needle angles were measured from the high-fidelity 3D models with optimally placed virtual needles. Lateral fluoroscopic images of patients (n = 200) that received lumbar MB denervation were reviewed to measure patient-derived caudal needle angles (L3-L5 MB levels). Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the cadaver (L1-L5 MB levels) and patient-derived (L3-L5 MB levels) caudal needle angles. The cadaver and patient-derived mean caudal needle angles for L3-L5 MB levels were compared. Results: There was variability in the cadaver-derived mean caudal needle angles. The lowest mean caudal needle angle was the L1 MB level measured at 41.57 ± 8.56° (range: 27.14° - 53.96°). The highest was the L5 MB level with a mean caudal needle angle of 60.79 ± 8.55° (range: 46.97° - 79.74°). A total of 123 patients were included and 369 caudal needle angles (L3-L5 MB levels) were measured and analyzed. There was variability in the patient-derived mean caudal needle angles. The patient-derived mean caudal needle angles were 29.18 ± 8.77° (range: 11.80° - 61.31°), 33.34 ± 7.23° (range: 16.40° - 54.15°), and 49.08 ± 8.87° (range: 26.45° - 76.95°) for the L3, L4, and L5 MB levels, respectively. There was a significant difference in mean caudal needle angle between cadaver and patient-derived needle angles at the L3, L4, and L5 MB levels. Conclusions: Analysis of cadaver-derived needle angles versus patient-derived data suggests optimization of lumbar MB denervation requires greater caudal angulation to achieve parallel needle placement. Further research is required to assess the clinical implications.
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.