MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410234660 · doi:10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100587

The effectiveness of fluoroscopically guided lumbar facet steroid joint injections: A systematic review

2025· review· en· W4410234660 on OpenAlexaff
Alexandra E. Fogarty, Jordan A Buttner, Belinda Duszynski, Michael J. McKenna, David C. Miller, Alan Gonzalez-Cota, Arsenio Avila, Eduard Vaynberg, Samir Sheth, Aaron Conger, Lisa Doan, Reza Ehsanian

Bibliographic record

VenueInterventional Pain Medicine · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsFacet (psychology)MedicineLumbarFacet jointJoint (building)RadiologyPsychologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary of background data: Facet joint degeneration is a known source of chronic axial low back pain, and intra-articular steroid injections (IASI) have been used as a treatment. Objectives: To systematically review the evidence of the effectiveness of fluoroscopically guided lumbar IASI for the treatment of lumbar facet joint pain. Methods: The primary outcome was ≥50 % pain reduction at ≥ 1 month, measured by Visual Analog Scale and/or Numeric Rating Scale. Secondary outcomes included ≥30 % functional improvement on a validated functional scale. Studies including group mean improvements in pain/function without categorical reporting were also considered. Two reviewers independently screened Embase, Cochrane, PubMed Medline, Ovid Medline, Web of Knowledge, and Google Scholar. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool, and evidence quality was evaluated using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Results: Of the 701 publications screened, 21 met the inclusion criteria. Success rates for clinically significant pain reduction (≥50 % pain relief) ranged from 13 to 74 %, and functional improvement (≥30 % improvement) was 29 % at ≥ 1 month, based on only one study. Overall, mean improvement ranged from 11 to 59 % for pain relief and 8-58 % for function at ≥ 1 month. In the seven studies selecting patients with facet or medial branch blocks, success rates for clinically significant pain reduction (≥50 % pain relief) are reported as 13-74 % at ≥ 1 month. In this subgroup, mean pain improvement rates ranged from 23 to 67 % and functional improvement from 15 to 58 % at ≥ 1 month. According to GRADE, the overall quality of the evidence is very low due to the high risk of bias, study heterogeneity, and inconsistent methodologies. Discussion/conclusion: Pragmatic and observational studies suggest IASI may reduce pain and disability, while sham-controlled trials have not demonstrated efficacy. Given the very low quality of evidence, the true effect of IASI is highly uncertain. Further high-quality, placebo-controlled studies using standardized diagnostic criteria are needed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.058
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.351 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInterventional Pain MedicineSame topicSpine and Intervertebral Disc PathologyFrench-language works237,207