TY - JOUR
T1 - Multicenter, randomized, comparative cost-effectiveness study comparing 0, 1, and 2 diagnostic medial branch (Facet Joint Nerve) block treatment paradigms before lumbar facet radiofrequency denervation
AU - Cohen, Steven P.
AU - Williams, Kayode A.
AU - Kurihara, Connie
AU - Nguyen, Conner
AU - Shields, Cynthia
AU - Kim, Peter
AU - Griffith, Scott R.
AU - Larkin, Thomas M.
AU - Crooks, Matthew
AU - Williams, Necia
AU - Morlando, Benny
AU - Strassels, Scott A.
N1 - Funding Information:
Supported in part by a Congressional Grant from the John P. Murtha Neuroscience and Pain Institute, Johnstown, Pennsylvania; the U.S. Army; and the Army Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine Initiative, Washington, D.C. The opinions or assertions contained herein are the private views of the authors and are not to be construed as official or as reflecting the views of the Department of the Army or the Department of Defense.
PY - 2010/8
Y1 - 2010/8
N2 - Background: Among patients presenting with axial low back pain, facet arthropathy accounts for approximately 10-15% of cases. Facet interventions are the second most frequently performed procedures in pain clinics across the United States. Currently, there are no uniformly accepted criteria regarding how best to select patients for radiofrequency denervation. Methods: A randomized, multicenter study was performed in 151 subjects with suspected lumbar facetogenic pain comparing three treatment paradigms. Group 0 received radiofrequency denervation based solely on clinical findings; group 1 underwent denervation contingent on a positive response to a single diagnostic block; and group 2 proceeded to denervation only if they obtained a positive response to comparative blocks done with lidocaine and bupivacaine. A positive outcome was predesignated as ≥50% pain relief coupled with a positive global perceived effect persisting for 3 months. Results: In group 0, 17 patients (33%) obtained a successful outcome at 3 months versus eight patients (16%) in group 1 and 11 (22%) patients in group 2. Denervation success rates in groups 0, 1, and 2 were 33, 39, and 64%, respectively. Pain scores and functional capacity were significantly lower at 3 months but not at 1 month in group 2 subjects who proceeded to denervation compared with patients in groups 0 and 1. The costs per successful treatment in groups 0, 1, and 2 were $6,286, $17,142, and $15,241, respectively. Conclusions: Using current reimbursement scales, these findings suggest that proceeding to radiofrequency denervation without a diagnostic block is the most cost-effective treatment paradigm.
AB - Background: Among patients presenting with axial low back pain, facet arthropathy accounts for approximately 10-15% of cases. Facet interventions are the second most frequently performed procedures in pain clinics across the United States. Currently, there are no uniformly accepted criteria regarding how best to select patients for radiofrequency denervation. Methods: A randomized, multicenter study was performed in 151 subjects with suspected lumbar facetogenic pain comparing three treatment paradigms. Group 0 received radiofrequency denervation based solely on clinical findings; group 1 underwent denervation contingent on a positive response to a single diagnostic block; and group 2 proceeded to denervation only if they obtained a positive response to comparative blocks done with lidocaine and bupivacaine. A positive outcome was predesignated as ≥50% pain relief coupled with a positive global perceived effect persisting for 3 months. Results: In group 0, 17 patients (33%) obtained a successful outcome at 3 months versus eight patients (16%) in group 1 and 11 (22%) patients in group 2. Denervation success rates in groups 0, 1, and 2 were 33, 39, and 64%, respectively. Pain scores and functional capacity were significantly lower at 3 months but not at 1 month in group 2 subjects who proceeded to denervation compared with patients in groups 0 and 1. The costs per successful treatment in groups 0, 1, and 2 were $6,286, $17,142, and $15,241, respectively. Conclusions: Using current reimbursement scales, these findings suggest that proceeding to radiofrequency denervation without a diagnostic block is the most cost-effective treatment paradigm.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/77955174208
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/77955174208#tab=citedBy
U2 - 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181e33ae5
DO - 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181e33ae5
M3 - Article
C2 - 20613471
AN - SCOPUS:77955174208
SN - 0003-3022
VL - 113
SP - 395
EP - 405
JO - Anesthesiology
JF - Anesthesiology
IS - 2
ER -