The effect of minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion compared to sham operation: a double-blind randomized-controlled trial

被引:3
|
作者
Randers, Engelke Marie [1 ,2 ,7 ]
Gerdhem, Paul [3 ,4 ,5 ]
Stuge, Britt [1 ,2 ]
Diarbakerli, Elias [3 ,6 ]
Nordsletten, Lars [1 ,2 ]
Rohrl, Stephan M. [1 ,2 ]
Kibsgard, Thomas Johan [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Oslo Univ Hosp, Div Orthopaed Surg, Oslo, Norway
[2] Univ Oslo, Inst Clin Med, Oslo, Norway
[3] Karolinska Inst, Dept Clin Sci Intervent & Technol CLINTEC, Stockholm, Sweden
[4] Uppsala Univ, Dept Surg Sci, Uppsala, Sweden
[5] Uppsala Univ Hosp, Dept Orthopaed & Hand Surg, Uppsala, Sweden
[6] Karolinska Univ Hosp, Dept Reconstruct Orthoped, Stockholm, Sweden
[7] Oslo Univ Hosp, Dept Spine Deform, Div Orthopaed Surg, Postal box 4950 Nydalen, N-0424 Oslo, Norway
关键词
Sacroiliac joint pain; Sacroiliac joint fusion; Sham surgery; Placebo; Orthopedic surgery; PAIN RATING-SCALE; LOW-BACK-PAIN; WALK TEST; QUESTIONNAIRE; OSTEOARTHRITIS; GUIDELINES; OUTCOMES; SURGERY;
D O I
10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102438
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background Minimally invasive fusion of the sacroiliac joint as treatment for low back pain may reduce pain and improve function compared to non-operative treatment, although clear evidence is lacking. The aim of this trial was to evaluate the effect of minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion compared to sham surgery on sacroiliac joint pain reduction. Methods In this double-blind randomized sham surgery-controlled trial patients with clinical diagnosis of sacroiliac joint pain confirmed with sacroiliac joint injection were included at two university hospitals in Sweden and Norway. Patients were randomized by the operating surgeon at each site to minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion or sham surgery. The primary endpoint was group difference in sacroiliac joint pain on the operated side at six months postoperatively, measured by the Numeric Rating Scale (0-10). Un-blinding and primary analysis were performed when all patients had completed six months follow-up. The trial is closed for new participants and was registered at clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03507049. Findings Between September 1st, 2018 and October 22nd, 2021, 63 patients were randomized, 32 to the surgical group, 31 to the sham group. Mean age was 45 years (range 26-63) and 59 of 63 (94%) patients were female. The mean reduction in the operated sacroiliac joint from baseline to six months postoperative was 2.6 Numeric Rating Scale points in the surgical group and 1.7 points in the sham group (mean between groups difference -1.0 points; 95% CI, -2.2 to 0.3; p = 0.13). Interpretation This double-blind randomized controlled trial could not prove that minimally invasive fusion of the sacroiliac joint was superior to sham surgery at six months postoperative. Copyright (c) 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] The effect of minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion compared with sham operation: study protocol of a prospective double-blinded multicenter randomized controlled trial
    Randers, Engelke Marie
    Gerdhem, Paul
    Dahl, Jon
    Stuge, Britt
    Kibsgard, Thomas Johan
    ACTA ORTHOPAEDICA, 2022, 93 : 75 - 81
  • [2] The effect of minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion compared with sham operation: study protocol of a prospective double-blinded multicenter randomized controlled trial
    Randers, Engelke Marie
    Gerdhem, Paul
    Dahl, Jon
    Stuge, Britt
    Kibsgard, Thomas Johan
    ACTA ORTHOPAEDICA, 2022, 93 : 75 - 81
  • [3] Effectiveness of intra-articular analgesia in reducing postoperative pain after minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion: a double-blind randomized controlled trial
    Sem M. M. Hermans
    Jorm M. Nellensteijn
    Rob Knoef
    Henk van Santbrink
    Ruud Droeghaag
    Jasper Most
    Mattheus K. Reinders
    Daisy M. N. Hoofwijk
    Jan W. Potters
    Kris L. L. Movig
    Inez Curfs
    Wouter L. W. van Hemert
    Scientific Reports, 14 (1)
  • [4] Randomized Sham-controlled Double-Blind Multicenter Clinical Trial to Ascertain the Effect of Percutaneous Radiofrequency Treatment for Sacroiliac Joint Pain: Three-month Results
    van Tilburg, Cornelis W. J.
    Schuurmans, Fleur A.
    Stronks, Dirk L.
    Groeneweg, Johannes G.
    Huygen, Frank J. P. M.
    CLINICAL JOURNAL OF PAIN, 2016, 32 (11): : 921 - 926
  • [5] Perioperative methadone for posterior spinal fusion in adolescents: Results from a double-blind randomized-controlled trial
    Fons, Roger A.
    Hainsworth, Keri R.
    Michlig, Johanna
    Jablonski, Megan
    Czarnecki, Michelle L.
    Weisman, Steven J.
    PEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA, 2024, 34 (05) : 438 - 447
  • [6] A DOUBLE-BLIND, RANDOMIZED, SHAM-CONTROLLED TRIAL OF THE GASTRIC BUBBLE FOR OBESITY
    HOGAN, RB
    JOHNSTON, JH
    LONG, BW
    SONES, JQ
    HINTON, LA
    BUNGE, J
    CORRIGAN, SA
    GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 1989, 35 (05) : 381 - 385
  • [7] Minimally Invasive versus Classic Procedures in Total Hip Arthroplasty A Double-blind Randomized Controlled Trial
    Goosen, Jon H. M.
    Kollen, Boudewijn J.
    Castelein, Rene M.
    Kuipers, Bart M.
    Verheyen, Cees C.
    CLINICAL ORTHOPAEDICS AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2011, 469 (01) : 200 - 208
  • [8] Treatment of the sacroiliac joint in patients with leg pain: a randomized-controlled trial
    Visser, L. H.
    Woudenberg, N. P.
    de Bont, J.
    van Eijs, F.
    Verwer, K.
    Jenniskens, H.
    Den Oudsten, B. L.
    EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2013, 22 (10) : 2310 - 2317
  • [9] Treatment of the sacroiliac joint in patients with leg pain: a randomized-controlled trial
    L. H. Visser
    N. P. Woudenberg
    J. de Bont
    F. van Eijs
    K. Verwer
    H. Jenniskens
    B. L. Den Oudsten
    European Spine Journal, 2013, 22 : 2310 - 2317
  • [10] Kinesio taping or sham taping in knee osteoarthritis? A randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trial
    Kocyigit, Figen
    Turkmen, Mehmet Besir
    Acar, Merve
    Guldane, Nezahat
    Kose, Tugce
    Kuyucu, Ersin
    Erdil, Mehmet
    COMPLEMENTARY THERAPIES IN CLINICAL PRACTICE, 2015, 21 (04) : 262 - 267