Bengt Sturesson1, Djaya Kools2, Robert Pflugmacher3, Alessandro Gasbarrini4, Domenico Prestamburgo5, Julius Dengler6. 1. Department of Orthopedics, Aleris, Ängelholm Hospital, Ängelholm, Sweden. sturesson.bengt@gmail.com. 2. Department of Neurosurgery, Onze-Lieve-Vrouw Hospital Aalst, Aalst, Belgium. 3. Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany. 4. Instituto Ortopedico Rizzoli di Bologna, Bologna, Italy. 5. Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, ASST Ovest Milanese, Ospedale di Legnano, Legnano, Italy. 6. Department of Neurosurgery, Charité, Universitaetsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the safety and effectiveness of minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion (SIJF) using triangular titanium implants vs conservative management (CM) in patients with chronic sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain. METHODS:103 adults with chronic SIJ pain at nine sites in four European countries were randomly assigned to and underwent either minimally invasive SIJF using triangular titanium implants (N = 52) or CM (N = 51). CM was performed according to the European guidelines for the diagnosis and management of pelvic girdle pain and consisted of optimization of medical therapy, individualized physical therapy (PT) and adequate information and reassurance as part of a multifactorial treatment. The primary outcome was the difference in change in self-rated low back pain (LBP) at 6 months. Additional endpoints included quality of life using EQ-5D-3L, disability using Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), SIJ function using active straight leg raise (ASLR) test and adverse events. NCT01741025. RESULTS: At 6 months, mean LBP improved by 43.3 points in the SIJF group and 5.7 points in the CM group (difference of 38.1 points, p < 0.0001). Mean ODI improved by 26 points in the SIJF group and 6 points in the CM group (p < 0.0001). ASLR, EQ-5D-3L, walking distance and satisfaction were statistically superior in the SIJF group. The frequency of adverse events did not differ between groups. One case of postoperative nerve impingement occurred in the surgical group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with chronic SIJ pain, minimally invasive SIJF using triangular titanium implants was safe and more effective than CM in relieving pain, reducing disability, improving patient function and quality of life.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To compare the safety and effectiveness of minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion (SIJF) using triangular titanium implants vs conservative management (CM) in patients with chronic sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain. METHODS: 103 adults with chronic SIJ pain at nine sites in four European countries were randomly assigned to and underwent either minimally invasive SIJF using triangular titanium implants (N = 52) or CM (N = 51). CM was performed according to the European guidelines for the diagnosis and management of pelvic girdle pain and consisted of optimization of medical therapy, individualized physical therapy (PT) and adequate information and reassurance as part of a multifactorial treatment. The primary outcome was the difference in change in self-rated low back pain (LBP) at 6 months. Additional endpoints included quality of life using EQ-5D-3L, disability using Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), SIJ function using active straight leg raise (ASLR) test and adverse events. NCT01741025. RESULTS: At 6 months, mean LBP improved by 43.3 points in the SIJF group and 5.7 points in the CM group (difference of 38.1 points, p < 0.0001). Mean ODI improved by 26 points in the SIJF group and 6 points in the CM group (p < 0.0001). ASLR, EQ-5D-3L, walking distance and satisfaction were statistically superior in the SIJF group. The frequency of adverse events did not differ between groups. One case of postoperative nerve impingement occurred in the surgical group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with chronic SIJ pain, minimally invasive SIJF using triangular titanium implants was safe and more effective than CM in relieving pain, reducing disability, improving patient function and quality of life.
Authors: Brook I Martin; Sohail K Mirza; Bryan A Comstock; Darryl T Gray; William Kreuter; Richard A Deyo Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2007-02-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Brook I Martin; Sohail K Mirza; David R Flum; Thomas M Wickizer; Patrick J Heagerty; Alex F Lenkoski; Richard A Deyo Journal: Spine J Date: 2011-12-21 Impact factor: 4.166
Authors: Arnold Graham Smith; Robyn Capobianco; Daniel Cher; Leonard Rudolf; Donald Sachs; Mukund Gundanna; Jeffrey Kleiner; Milan G Mody; A Nick Shamie Journal: Ann Surg Innov Res Date: 2013-10-30
Authors: Niels Hammer; Mario Scholze; Thomas Kibsgård; Stefan Klima; Stefan Schleifenbaum; Thomas Seidel; Michael Werner; Ronny Grunert Journal: J Anat Date: 2018-12-09 Impact factor: 2.610
Authors: Simon Heinrich Bayerl; Tobias Finger; Petra Heiden; Nazli Esfahani-Bayerl; Christopher Topar; Vincent Prinz; Johannes Woitzik; Julius Dengler; Peter Vajkoczy Journal: Neurosurg Rev Date: 2018-07-31 Impact factor: 3.042
Authors: David W Polly; John Swofford; Peter G Whang; Clay J Frank; John A Glaser; Robert P Limoni; Daniel J Cher; Kathryn D Wine; Jonathan N Sembrano Journal: Int J Spine Surg Date: 2016-08-23