Top

European Spine Journal

Published in:

29-06-2022 | Pathology | Review Article

The efficacy of primary sacroiliac joint fusion for low back pain caused by sacroiliac joint pathology: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Authors: Aazad Abbas, Jin Tong Du, Jay Toor, Anne Versteeg, Joel A. Finkelstein

Published in: European Spine Journal | Issue 10/2022

Abstract

Purpose

Conduct a systematic review to quantify the effect of primary sacroiliac joint fusion (SIJF) for the treatment of sacroiliac (SI) joint pathology on patient reported outcomes.

Methods

Medline, Embase, Cochrane, PubMed, and Scopus databases were searched prior to August 18th, 2020 for all English-Language studies involving the treatment of SIJ pathology through SIJF and/or conservative management (CM). The quality of included studies was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Primary outcome measure was the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for low back pain. Secondary outcome measure was the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the incidence of adverse reactions.

Results

A total of 564 patients and six studies were included. The overall quality of evidence analyzed by this review was low (GRADE = 0). Five out of the six studies were industry funded. The VAS standardized mean difference (SMD) between SIJF and CM at three months and six months follow-up was − 1.4 [95% confidence interval − 2.3, − 0.6] and − 1.5 [95% CI − 1.8, − 1.1]. The ODI SMD between SIJF and CM scores at three months and 6 months follow-up was − 0.9 [95% CI − 1.1, − 0.7] and − 1.1 [95% CI − 1.6, − 0.5]. The odds ratio of adverse reactions due to SIJF compared to CM was 1.9 [95% CI 0.1, 42.8].

Conclusion

Based on the limited number of independent trials with long-term follow-up, SIJF shows potential as a surgical treatment option for SIJ pathology.

PROSPERO registration

CRD42020206149 (25th September 2020).

Available only for authorised users

Salomon JA, Vos T, Hogan DR et al (2012) Common values in assessing health outcomes from disease and injury: disability weights measurement study for the global burden of disease study 2010. Lancet 380(9859):2129–2143. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61680-8CrossRefPubMed

Freburger JK, Holmes GM, Agans RP et al (2009) The rising prevalence of chronic low back pain. Arch Intern Med 169(3):251–258. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinternmed.2008.543CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Ferguson SA, Merryweather A, Thiese MS et al (2019) Prevalence of low back pain, seeking medical care, and lost time due to low back pain among manual material handling workers in the United States. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 20(1):243. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-019-2594-0CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Manchikanti L, Singh V, Datta S, Cohen SP, Hirsch JA (2009) Comprehensive review of epidemiology, scope, and impact of spinal pain. Pain Physician 12(4):35CrossRef

Ritzwoller DP, Crounse L, Shetterly S, Rublee D (2006) The association of comorbidities, utilization and costs for patients identified with low back pain. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 7:72. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-7-72CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Katz JN (2006) Lumbar disc disorders and low-back pain: socioeconomic factors and consequences. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88(Suppl 2):21–24. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.E.01273CrossRefPubMed

Bernard TN, Kirkaldy-Willis WH (1987) Recognizing specific characteristics of nonspecific low back pain. Clin Orthop Relat Res 217:266–280CrossRef

Sembrano JN, Polly DW (2009) How often is low back pain not coming from the back? Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34(1):27. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31818b8882CrossRef

Schwarzer AC, Aprill CN, Bogduk N (1995) The sacroiliac joint in chronic low back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 20(1):31–37. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199501000-00007CrossRef

10.

Polly DW, Cher D (2016) Ignoring the sacroiliac joint in chronic low back pain is costly. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res 8:23–31. https://doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S97345CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Schmidt GL, Bhandutia AK, Altman DT (2018) Management of sacroiliac joint pain. JAAOS-J Am Acad Orthop Surg 26(17):610–616. https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOS-D-15-00063CrossRef

12.

Cohen SP (2005) Sacroiliac joint pain: a comprehensive review of anatomy, diagnosis, and treatment. Anesth Analg 101(5):1440–1453. https://doi.org/10.1213/01.ANE.0000180831.60169.EACrossRefPubMed

13.

Lorio MP, Rashbaum R (2014) ISASS policy statement—minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion. Int J Spine Surg. https://doi.org/10.14444/1025CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

McGuire RA, Chen Z, Donahoe K (2012) Dual fibular allograft dowel technique for sacroiliac joint arthrodesis. Evid Based Spine Care J 3(3):21–28. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1327806CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Buchowski JM, Kebaish KM, Sinkov V, Cohen DB, Sieber AN, Kostuik JP (2005) Functional and radiographic outcome of sacroiliac arthrodesis for the disorders of the sacroiliac joint. Spine J. 5(5):520–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2005.02.022CrossRefPubMed

16.

Belanger TA, Dall BE (2001) Sacroiliac arthrodesis using a posterior midline fascial splitting approach and pedicle screw instrumentation: a new technique. Clin Spine Surg 14(2):118–124

17.

Lorio MP, Polly DW, Ninkovic I, Ledonio CGT, Hallas K, Andersson G (2014) Utilization of minimally invasive surgical approach for sacroiliac joint fusion in surgeon population of ISASS and SMISS membership. Open Orthop J 8:1–6. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874325001408010001CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Martin CT, Haase L, Lender PA, Polly DW (2020) Minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion: the current evidence. Int J Spine Surg 14:S20–S29. https://doi.org/10.14444/6072CrossRefPubMedCentral

19.

Heiney J, Capobianco R, Cher D (2015) A systematic review of minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion utilizing a lateral transarticular technique. Int J Spine Surg. https://doi.org/10.14444/2040CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Group TP (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 6(7):e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

21.

Abbas A, Du JT, Toor J, Versteeg A, Finkelstein J (2020) The efficacy of primary sacroiliac joint fusion for lower back pain caused by sacroiliac joint pathology: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PROSPERO

22.

Holger S, Jan B, Gordon G, Andrew O (2013) GRADE handbook. https://gdt.gradepro.org/app/handbook/handbook.html. Accessed 7 Feb 2021.

23.

Sturesson B, Kools D, Pflugmacher R, Gasbarrini A, Prestamburgo D, Dengler J (2017) Six-month outcomes from a randomized controlled trial of minimally invasive SI joint fusion with triangular titanium implants versus conservative management. Eur Spine J 26(3):708–719. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-016-4599-9CrossRefPubMed

24.

Dengler JD, Kools D, Pflugmacher R et al (2017) 1-Year results of a randomized controlled trial of conservative management versus minimally invasive surgical treatment for sacroiliac joint pain. Pain Physician 20(6):537–550CrossRef

25.

Dengler J, Kools D, Pflugmacher R et al (2019) Randomized trial of sacroiliac joint arthrodesis compared with conservative management for chronic low back pain attributed to the sacroiliac joint. J Bone Joint Surg Am 101(5):400–411. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.18.00022CrossRefPubMed

26.

Whang P, Cher D, Polly D et al (2015) Sacroiliac joint fusion using triangular titanium implants versus non-surgical management: six-month outcomes from a prospective randomized controlled trial. Int J Spine Surg. https://doi.org/10.14444/2006CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Polly DW, Swofford J, Whang PG et al (2016) Two-year outcomes from a randomized controlled trial of minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion vs. non-surgical management for sacroiliac joint dysfunction. Int J Spine Surg. https://doi.org/10.14444/3028CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

28.

Duhon BS, Cher DJ, Wine KD, Lockstadt H, Kovalsky D, Soo C (2013) Safety and 6-month effectiveness of minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion: a prospective study. Med Devices (Auckl) 6:219–229. https://doi.org/10.2147/MDER.S55197CrossRef

29.

Duhon BS, Bitan F, Lockstadt H, Kovalsky D, Cher D, Hillen T (2016) Triangular titanium implants for minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion: 2-year follow-up from a prospective multicenter trial. Int J Spine Surg 10:13. https://doi.org/10.14444/3013CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

30.

Murakami E, Kurosawa D, Aizawa T (2018) Sacroiliac joint arthrodesis for chronic sacroiliac joint pain: an anterior approach and clinical outcomes with a minimum 5-year follow-up. J Neurosurg Spine 29(3):279–285. https://doi.org/10.3171/2018.1.SPINE17115CrossRefPubMed

31.

Fuchs V, Ruhl B (2018) Distraction arthrodesis of the sacroiliac joint: 2-year results of a descriptive prospective multi-center cohort study in 171 patients. Eur Spine J 27(1):194–204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-017-5313-2CrossRefPubMed

32.

Rappoport LH, Luna IY, Joshua G (2017) Minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion using a novel hydroxyapatite-coated screw: preliminary 1-year clinical and radiographic results of a 2-Year prospective study. World Neurosurg 101:493–497. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2017.02.046CrossRefPubMed

33.

Tran ZV, Ivashchenko A, Brooks L (2019) Sacroiliac joint fusion methodology-minimally invasive compared to screw-type surgeries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Pain Physician 22(1):29–40CrossRef

34.

Lingutla KK, Pollock R, Ahuja S (2016) Sacroiliac joint fusion for low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Spine J 25(6):1924–1931. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-016-4490-8CrossRefPubMed

35.

Pope J (2020) A single arm, multicenter, prospective, clinical study on a novel minimally invasive posterior sacroiliac fusion device. Evolve Restorative Center

36.

Cher D (2021) Sacroiliac joint stabilization in long fusion to the pelvis: randomized controlled trial. SI-BONE Inc

37.

Kibsgård TJ (2021) Sacroiliac joint fusion versus sham operation for treatment of sacroiliac joint pain. a prospective double blinded randomized controlled multicenter trial

Title: The efficacy of primary sacroiliac joint fusion for low back pain caused by sacroiliac joint pathology: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Authors: Aazad Abbas
Jin Tong Du
Jay Toor
Anne Versteeg
Joel A. Finkelstein
Publication date: 29-06-2022
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Keywords: Pathology
Back Pain
Back Pain
Back Pain
Published in: European Spine Journal / Issue 10/2022
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-022-07291-y

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

The efficacy of primary sacroiliac joint fusion for low back pain caused by sacroiliac joint pathology: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

PROSPERO registration

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

PROSPERO registration

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 10/2022

Comparisons between needle puncture and chondroitinase ABC to induce intervertebral disc degeneration in rabbits

Evolution of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and titanium interbody devices for spinal procedures: a comprehensive review of the literature

Transcranial electric stimulation motor evoked potentials for cervical spine intraoperative monitoring complications: systematic review and illustrative case of cardiac arrest

Venous injection of a triphasic calcium-based implant in a sheep model of pulmonary embolism demonstrates minimal acute systemic effects

What is success of treatment? Expected outcome scores in cervical radiculopathy patients were much higher than the previously reported cut-off values for success

Anatomical analysis of the C2 pedicle in patients with basilar invagination