University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center

The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) Evidence-Based Clinical Guideline of Interventional Treatments for Low Back Pain

Author/s:

Sayed, D., Grider, J., Strand, N., Hagedorn, J. M., Falowski, S., Lam, C. M., Francio, V. T., Beall, D. P., Tomycz, N. D., Davanzo, J. R., Aiyer, R., Lee, D. W., Kaila, H., Sheen, S., Malinowski, M. N., Verdolin, M., Vodapally, S., Carayannopoulos, A., Jain, S., Azeem, N., Tolba, R., Chien, G. C. C., Ghosh, P., Mazzola, A. J., Amirdelfan, K., Chakravarthy, K., Petersen, E., Schatman, M. E., Deer, T.

Introduction
Painful lumbar spinal disorders represent a leading cause of disability in the US and worldwide. Interventional treatments for lumbar disorders are an effective treatment for the pain and disability from low back pain. Although many established and emerging interventional procedures are currently available, there exists a need for a defined guideline for their appropriateness, effectiveness, and safety.

Objective
The ASPN Back Guideline was developed to provide clinicians the most comprehensive review of interventional treatments for lower back disorders. Clinicians should utilize the ASPN Back Guideline to evaluate the quality of the literature, safety, and efficacy of interventional treatments for lower back disorders.

Methods
The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) identified an educational need for a comprehensive clinical guideline to provide evidence-based recommendations. Experts from the fields of Anesthesiology, Physiatry, Neurology, Neurosurgery, Radiology, and Pain Psychology developed the ASPN Back Guideline. The world literature in English was searched using Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, BioMed Central, Web of Science, Google Scholar, PubMed, Current Contents Connect, Scopus, and meeting abstracts to identify and compile the evidence (per section) for back-related pain. Search words were selected based upon the section represented. Identified peer-reviewed literature was critiqued using United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria and consensus points are presented.

Results
After a comprehensive review and analysis of the available evidence, the ASPN Back Guideline group was able to rate the literature and provide therapy grades to each of the most commonly available interventional treatments for low back pain.

Conclusion
The ASPN Back Guideline represents the first comprehensive analysis and grading of the existing and emerging interventional treatments available for low back pain. This will be a living document which will be periodically updated to the current standard of care based on the available evidence within peer-reviewed literature.

Keywords: back pain, intervention, clinical guideline, spinal cord stimulation, minimally invasive spine procedure, lumbar disorder, epidural steroid injection, radiofrequency ablation

Keywords

evidence-based interventional treatments Low Back Pain lumbar spinal disorders Pain

The Effectiveness of Intraosseous Basivertebral Nerve Radiofrequency Ablation for the Treatment of Vertebrogenic Low Back Pain: An Updated Systematic Review with Single-Arm Meta-analysis

Author/s:

Conger, A., Burnham, T. R., Clark, T., Teramoto, M, McCormick, Z. L.

Objective. To provide an estimate of the effectiveness of basivertebral nerve (BVN) radiofrequency ablation (RFA) to
treat vertebrogenic low back pain (LBP). Design. Systematic review with single-arm meta-analysis. Population.
Persons 18 years of age with chronic LBP associated with type 1 or 2 Modic changes. Intervention. Intraosseous
BVN RFA. Comparison. Sham, placebo procedure, active standard care treatment, or none. Outcomes. The proportion
of patients treated with BVN RFA who reported 50% pain score improvement on a visual analog scale or numeric
rating scale. The main secondary outcome was 15-point improvement in Oswestry Disability Index score. Methods.
Three reviewers independently assessed articles published before December 6, 2021, in MEDLINE and Embase. The
Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was used to evaluate
the overall quality of evidence. Results. Of the 856 unique records screened, 12 publications met the inclusion criteria,
representing six unique study populations, with 414 participants allocated to receive BVN RFA. Single-arm metaanalysis showed a success rate of 65% (95% confidence interval [CI] 51–78%) and 64% (95% CI 43–82%) for 50%
pain relief at 6 and 12 months, respectively. Rates of 15-point Oswestry Disability Index score improvement were
75% (95% CI 63–86%) and 75% (95% CI 63–85%) at 6 and 12 months, respectively. Conclusion. According to GRADE,
there is moderate-quality evidence that BVN RFA effectively reduces pain and disability in most patients with vertebr

Keywords

Endplate Vertebrogenic Discogenic Modic Ablation