Trial reportPM & R : the journal of injury, function, and rehabilitation2026
Minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion: Primary endpoint results from the prospective, multicenter STACI study.
Trial report in PM & R : the journal of injury, function, and rehabilitation, 2026. 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.
- Minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion: Primary endpoint results from the prospective, multicenter STACI study.PM & R : the journal of injury, function, and rehabilitation · 2026Trial
- Revision sacroiliac joint fusion: mid-term patient-reported outcomes.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundChronic sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain is highly debilitating. Minimally invasive SIJ fusion has become a commonly performed surgical treatment for SIJ pain, with level I evidence showing clinically significant improvements in pain, function, and quality of life and a low adverse event rate. Primarily performed by surgeons, this procedure is increasingly being performed by interventional pain management (IPM) physicians. PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of lateral SIJ fusion performed by IPM physicians, compared with prior studies of similar devices. STUDY
designProspective, multicenter, single-arm clinical trial conducted at 15 U.S. sites. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 112 patients with a diagnosis of SIJ pain, who met study eligibility criteria, underwent lateral SIJ fusion. OUTCOME MEASURES: SIJ pain (numerical rating scale [NRS]), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), quality of life (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System [PROMIS]-29), patient satisfaction, and device/procedure-related adverse events.
methodsMedical and surgical history and patient-reported outcomes were assessed at baseline and follow-up at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Primary endpoint is change in SIJ pain from baseline to 6 months; statistical evaluation used a noninferiority approach with a 1-point noninferiority margin compared to prior studies of a similar device. Secondary endpoints included ODI, NRS, PROMIS-29, device/procedure-related adverse events, and evidence of fusion via computed tomography scan at 2 years. Twelve- and 24-month follow-up data collection is ongoing.
resultsMean (SD) participant age was 64 (14) years and 68% female. No serious or device-related adverse events occurred. At 6 months, mean SIJ pain decreased 5.2 points (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.7-5.7), meeting the study's primary noninferiority endpoint (p < .001 for noninferiority, p < .001 for change from baseline). A majority (91%) had a ≥2-point improvement in SIJ pain. ODI improved by 25.8 points (95% CI 22.2-29.4, p < .001 vs. baseline).
conclusionInterim trial results support the safety and effectiveness of lateral SIJ fusion performed by IPM physicians. Clinically significant improvements in pain and disability are commensurate with results from surgeon-performed randomized trials and published literature. Results should be reproduced in randomized trials.
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.