ArticleInterventional pain medicine2026
Prolonged response following anesthetic-only medial branch blocks: A retrospective analysis of 410 consecutive procedures.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Medial branch blocks (MBBs) are procedures using short-acting local anesthetics to identify candidates for radiofrequency neurotomy (RFN) in suspected facet-mediated pain. Although primarily prognostic tools, some studies report therapeutic responses to MBBs done with or without added corticosteroid, with rates ranging from 11% to over 50%. Even if intended as a diagnostic procedure, prolonged responses to anesthetic-only MBBs, defined as persisting days to months, well beyond the hours-long pharmacokinetic window of the local anesthetic, represent a diagnostic issue to physicians with a poorly defined incidence. This study retrospectively evaluated 410 consecutive MBBs to determine the proportion achieving documented sustained pain relief following anesthetic-only MBBs. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 410 consecutive MBBs performed during 2019 at a single academic institution by 4 fellowship-trained physiatrists. All procedures were performed using either 0.25 mL or 0.5 mL of 2% lidocaine or 0.5% bupivacaine. Therapeutic response was defined as meeting all three criteria: ≥80% pain relief calculated from chart records; no progression to repeat block or radiofrequency neurotomy; and explicit clinical documentation of sustained relief as the rationale for halting treatment. Chart review identified patients who did not progress for other reasons including insurance denial, patient preference, loss to follow-up, or alternative treatments. 95% confidence intervals were calculated for therapeutic response rates. Follow-up was retrospective and based on subsequent available medical record review rather than a standardized prospective assessment interval. Results: 410 patients underwent medial branch blocks of the cervical or lumbar spine in the study period. Eight patients (1.95%; 95% CI: 0.85-3.81%) met criteria for prolonged response with documented sustained benefit. Of these, minimum confirmed durations of relief ranged from 21 to 331 days (median 53 days; mean 86.5 days). An additional 11 patients (2.7%) did not progress but lacked documented rationale. Conclusions: This represents the lowest rate of prolonged pain relief following MBBs reported in published literature. Our findings do not support the premise that routine anesthetic-only MBBs have therapeutic benefit. This study is the first to quantify the incidence of how often a MBB intended for diagnostic purposes halts further treatment due to unexplained pain relief.
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.