ArticleCureus2026
The Diagnostic Funnel: A Multi-Stage Diagnostic Selection Protocol for Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fusion.
Article in Cureus, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion (MI SIJF) is an established intervention for chronic sacroiliac joint dysfunction, yet outcome variability across the literature suggests that surgical success may heavily depend on preoperative selection accuracy. Traditional diagnostic pathways relying on transient anesthetic blocks are susceptible to false-positives and variable responder rates. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of a rigorous, multi-stage selection protocol, termed the "diagnostic funnel," which utilizes a therapeutic durability threshold to ensure diagnostic specificity and optimize outcomes following MI SIJF. Methodology A retrospective chart review of 17 patients who underwent 19 MI SIJF procedures between January 2024 and August 2025 was conducted. To qualify for surgery, patients were required to meet all three stages of the "diagnostic funnel": 1) chronic non-radicular pain (>6 months) with a positive Fortin finger sign, 2) at least three out of six positive provocative physical maneuvers (SI [sacroiliac] compression, ASIS [anterior superior iliac spine] distraction, Gaenslen's test, FABER [flexion, abduction, external rotation)], thigh thrust, and Yeoman's test), and 3) a "durability threshold" defined as at least 70% pain relief maintained for a minimum of 14 days following an image-guided intra-articular corticosteroid injection. Surgical success was measured at the six-month follow-up by mean percent reduction in visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores and the proportion of patients achieving the minimal clinically important difference (MCID, defined as a ≥20-point VAS reduction). Results The cohort demonstrated 100% adherence to the multi-stage selection protocol. The most frequently positive provocative maneuvers were Gaenslen's test (94.7%), thigh thrust (89.5%), and FABER (89.5%). At six months postoperatively, patients achieved a mean VAS pain score reduction of 74.7%. Additionally, 94.4% of procedures successfully met or exceeded the MCID threshold for clinical success. Conclusion In this retrospective series, preoperative patient selection utilizing the multi-stage "diagnostic funnel" was associated with high clinical success rates. Replacing transient local anesthetic blocks with a 14-day corticosteroid "durability threshold" provides a more stable prognostic indicator of true intra-articular pathology. Adopting this diagnostic framework may allow spine surgeons to increase diagnostic specificity and consistently optimize postoperative pain reduction in MI SIJF patients.
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.