ArticleInterventional pain medicine2026
Characteristics of patients with cervical pain originating from the lateral atlanto-axial joint (C1-C2).
Article in Interventional pain medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The lateral C1-C2 joint is an understudied source of upper cervical pain and is typically investigated only after negative work-up at C2-C3 and C3-C4. The clinical profile of patients with presumed C1-C2 pain remains poorly defined, and the relationship between diagnostic block response and medium-term corticosteroid benefit is unclear. Objective: To characterize the clinical profile of patients with persistent upper cervical pain after negative C2-C3 and C3-C4 work-up who underwent C1-C2 intra-articular injection, and to identify factors associated with immediate diagnostic block response and with 3-month response to therapeutic intra-articular corticosteroid injection. Methods: In this prospective study, fifty participants were recruited from a tertiary/quaternary physiatry clinic between 2022 and 2025. All had persistent upper cervical pain after negative C2-C3 and C3-C4 medial branch blocks. Participants underwent fluoroscopy-guided intra-articular C1-C2 injection with lidocaine and dexamethasone. A positive response at T0 was defined as ≥50% pain relief at 30 min. A positive response at T3 was defined as ≥50% pain reduction and/or ≥5-point improvement on the Neck Disability Index. Results: Forty-nine participants were analyzed at T0 and forty-eight at T3. At T0, 22/49 participants (44.9%) responded to the diagnostic block. Facial pain was associated with lower odds of response, whereas predominant neck pain or combined neck and head/face pain was associated with greater odds of response. At T3, 16/48 participants (33.3%) met responder criteria. Electric shock-type pain was associated with lower odds of response, whereas reported pain on touch was associated with greater odds of response. Response at T0 did not predict response at T3. Conclusion: In patients with persistent upper cervical pain after negative C2-C3 and C3-C4 work-up, lateral C1-C2 pain may be more likely in those with predominant neck pain or combined neck and head/face pain. Factors associated with immediate diagnostic response differed from those associated with 3-month therapeutic benefit, suggesting that diagnostic and therapeutic phenotypes may not be equivalent at this level.
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.