An interventional study of echo-guided infiltration and non-echo-guided infiltration in Chronic Low-back Pain, sponsored by Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nice. Not yet recruiting at 2 sites in France. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-04-05.
Sponsored by Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nice · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
Lumbar facet joints have been implicated in chronic low back pain in over 45% of patients with isolated chronic common low back pain.
Low back pain is the most common form of spinal pain, more chronic and severe than cancer pain. The annual prevalence of chronic low back pain ranges from 15% to 45% (one-off prevalence, 30%; lifetime prevalence, 54-80%). Because of this extremely high incidence, doctors from a wide range of specialities perform interventional techniques in a variety of settings.
Facet joints have long been recognised as a source of back pain. In 1911, Goldthwait first recognised their role as a potential source of back pain. In 1933, Ghormley introduced the term "facet syndrome", defining lumbosacral pain with or without radicular pain. Badgley later suggested that facet joints could be a primary source of pain independently of spinal nerve compression. They demonstrated the role of posterior facet joints (PFJs) in a large number of patients with low back pain whose symptoms were not caused by a herniated disc. The underlying physiological concept of the PJF was introduced by Hirsch et al in 1963. They demonstrated that injecting a hypertonic saline solution into the region of the facet joints caused pain.
The management of chronic low back pain due to zygapophyseal involvement (lumbar facet joints) consists primarily of conservative treatment. This is based on analgesics, anti-inflammatory drugs, physiotherapy and weight loss, where appropriate. Other non-surgical options may be proposed, including glucocorticoid injections into the facet joints. Glucocorticoid injections, which act by reducing inflammation, are commonly used in routine care to treat spinal pain. This pain may be due to a variety of pathologies, including discogenic or facet-related, or mixed, ligamentous or muscular, linked to a regional or global disorder of spinal statics. They are commonly used as a standard treatment for chronic spinal pain.
Traditionally, in routine clinical practice, if there is significant paravertebral contracture and the clinical signs point to posterior joint involvement, a glucocorticoid injection is given in the doctor's surgery at the time of consultation, using anatomical landmarks to guide needle placement. However, few studies have demonstrated the efficacy of anatomical marking for infiltration of posterior joints, notably Cohen et al. Sui's systematic review of the use of this technique.
With the advent of new imaging modalities such as ultrasound, more and more practitioners are turning to image-guided injections. To date, only the fluoroscopy-guided technique is considered reliable for facet joint infiltration.
In order to improve the clinical efficacy of the various interventional therapeutic solutions, some authors have supported the use of ultrasound guidance. Several studies have been published comparing ultrasound-guided infiltration and infiltration using anatomical location in the shoulder region, the iliopsoas and in epicondilitis. While ultrasound guidance in areas such as the iliopsoas or the shoulder seems useful, it has not yet been proven that guidance is advantageous in spinal areas, such as the facet joints.
To our knowledge, no randomised, methodologically sound study has yet been carried out to compare the benefit of ultrasound-guided infiltration versus infiltration with anatomical location.
The aim of our study is to show that ultrasound-guided zygoapophyseal infiltration is superior to anatomically-guided infiltration in terms of pain assessment.
This is a multicentre, prospective, interventional study involving two groups of patients, randomised, blinded, category 2, at the Nice University Hospital, the Antibes University Hospital and the Cannes University Hospital. The control group will consist of patients receiving unguided infiltration. The experimental group will consist of patients receiving ultrasound-guided infiltration.
Inclusion and follow-up visits will be carried out at the following centres: Nice University Hospital, Antibes University Hospital and Cannes University Hospital. The infiltration (ultrasound-guided and non-ultrasound-guided) will be carried out by the rheumatologist sonographer at the Nice University Hospital only. The ultrasound will be performed by a trained rheumatologist using a low-frequency convex probe (1-8 MHz) and/or a linear probe (12-15 MhZ). The investigators will perform B-mode tracking in two perpendicular planes to locate the target. The probe will be positioned vertically about 3 to 4 cm to the left or right of the line of the spinous processes. The sonographic appearance of the spinous processes is easy to identify, as they form several 'bumps'. The injection will be carried out under strict aseptic conditions, with the lumbar puncture needle (20G) introduced in line with the probe at an angle of approximately 45° longitudinally to the axis of the posterior articular joints. The needle will be advanced under local anaesthetic using approximately 5 cc of 5% Xylocaine until contact with the bone, positioning and adapting the needle dynamically throughout the procedure. The symptomatic joint will be injected with 1 ml of betamethasone. The duration of the procedure (from disinfection to removal of the needle) will be recorded, as will the immediate post-gestational complications and finally the VAS of the pain felt by the patient.
2,875 studies on the registry are indexed under Low Back Pain; 484 are open to participants now.
This study's planned enrollment of 102 is above the median of 60 across 2,315 interventional studies indexed under Low Back Pain.
Browse Low Back Pain studies →Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nice is the lead sponsor of 722 studies on the registry; 176 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Procedure: non-echo-guided infiltration
Procedure: echo-guided infiltration
the subjects will receive their injection in the ultrasound room. a glucocorticoid injection is given at the time of consultation, using anatomical ultrasound scan to guide needle placement
the subjects will receive their injection in the ultrasound room. a glucocorticoid injection is given at the time of consultation, using anatomical landmarks to guide needle placement. The investigator simulate an ultrasound scan with a film shown on the screen.
Change of pain progression
The difference in pain progression between baseline and 3 months will be assessed using a visual analogue scale (0-100). The VAS is graduated from 0 to 100 mm, with 0 = no pain and 100 = maximum pain perceived in the 48 hours preceding the consultation, as recommended by the OARSI in osteoarthritis on pain assessment. The pain VAS will be assessed at rest, at night and during activities. This will be documented at the start of the study, and three months later, using the VAS and the remission rate (VAS \< 4).
Time frame: at inclusion, and three months after procedure
measure function state by EIFEL questionnaire
In french "Echelle d'Incapacité Fonctionnelle pour l'Evaluation des Lombalgies" (EIFEL) questionnaire is a Functional Disability Scale for the Assessment of Low Back Pain. The questionnaire is composed of 24 sentences to describe the patient's physical condition. The maximal value is 24, means a very disabling functional disability. Higher scores mean a worse outcome. The difference in the evolution of the EIFEL questionnaire between baseline and 3 months compared between the two groups will be measured. The EIFEL index is a french translation of the Rolland Morris questionnaire and has been validated for acute low back pain. It explores disability by combining handicap, impairment and incapacity.
Time frame: at inclusion and 3 months after procedure
measure function state by ODI questionnaire
Evaluation of the difference in patients' functional status using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) between baseline and 3 months, compared between the two groups. The Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire is used to measure the extent of pain-induced functional limitations in people with low back pain. The questionnaire provides the user with details of the general day-to-day functioning of the low back pain patient. Six response options are available for the following items: pain intensity, personal care (washing, dressing), lifting objects, moving around, sitting or standing, sleeping, sex life, social life, and travel/transportation. The first response option (score 0) denotes the absence of pain-related restrictions, while the sixth response option (score 5) denotes the greatest perceived restriction of an activity caused by pain.
Time frame: at inclusion and 3 months after procedure
pain evaluation by VAS scale
The VAS is graduated from 0 to 100 mm, with 0 = no pain and 100 = maximum pain perceived.The pain VAS will be assessed at rest, at night and during activities. This will be documented at t 30 minutes after the procedure, one month, two months later, using the VAS and the remission rate (VAS \< 4).
Time frame: at 30 minutes , one month and two months after the procedure
This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Mar 2024. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nice →