Interventional Treatments for Low Back Pain
Summary of Recommendations
Epidural Steroid Injections
Recommendation | Grade | Level | Level of certainty |
Interlaminar epidural injections for treatment of low back and radicular pain originating from disc disease, spinal stenosis and for chronic back/leg pain after surgical intervention | A | I-A | High |
Transforaminal epidural injections for treatment of low back and radicular pain originating from disc disease, spinal stenosis and for chronic back/leg pain after surgical intervention | A | I-A | High |
Caudal epidural injections for treatment of low back and radicular pain originating from disc disease, spinal stenosis and for chronic back/leg pain after surgical intervention when interlaminar or transforaminal approaches are not feasible | A | I-A | High |
Use of either steroid or local anesthetic or the two classes of medication in combination for use in epidural injections for treatment of low back and radicular pain originating from disc disease, spinal stenosis and for chronic back/leg pain after surgical intervention | A | I-A | High |
Trigger Point Injections
Recommendation | Grade | Level | Level of certainty |
The type of medication for TPI does not make a significant difference in pain outcomes | A | I-A | Strong |
Eliciting a localized twitch response for needle placement predicts best outcomes | A | I-A | Strong |
In medically refractory cases, TPI with BTXA may be of benefit | C | I-B | Moderate |
Dilute local anesthetic concentrations may result in less injection pain | I | II | Weak |
Novel injectables may be of benefit for MPS | I | II | Weak |
Adjunct therapies may be of use to prolong the relief of TPI for MPS | I | II | Weak |
Intra-Articular Facet Injections
Recommendation | Grade | Level | Level of certainty |
Intra-articular facet steroid injections do not replace or delay the need for RFA. | C | I-A | Strong |
Intra-articular facet steroid injections can be prognostic for RFA | C | I-A | Strong |
In acute cases of facet mediate pain, facet steroid injections may help due to possible inflammatory component | C | I-B | Moderate |
Combining facet steroid injections with oral NSAIDs can be more effective than injection therapy alone | B | II | Moderate |
Image guided facet steroid injections are more effective than blind injections | A | I-A | Strong |
Do not use intra-articular facet joint steroid injections as sole therapy for facet-mediated pain. | B | I-A | Strong |
Whitacre needles can reduce the risk of IV injection during MBB | C | I-A | Moderate |
Lumbar Medial Branch Blocks can be prognostic for RFA | A | I-A | Strong |
Regenerative Therapies
Recommendation | Grade | Level | Level of certainty |
Intradiscal PRP in the treatment of discogenic LBP | I | I-B | Low |
Intradiscal allogeneic mesenchymal stem cells in the treatment of discogenic LBP | I | I-B | Low |
Intradiscal bone marrow derived MSCs | I | I-B | Low |
Intradiscal adipose tissue derived MSCs | I | I-C | Low |
Sacroiliac Joint Injections
Recommendation | Grade | Level | Level of certainty |
Sacroiliac joint injections have been associated with positive predictive value in diagnosis of SIJ dysfunction | A | I-A | Strong |
Sacroiliac joint injections demonstrate short term relief of SIJ dysfunction | B | I-B | Moderate |
PILD Injections
Recommendation | Grade | Level | Level of certainty |
Percutaneous lumbar decompression for ligamentum flavum hypertrophy with the diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis | A | I-A | Strong |
Interspinous Spacers, Indirect Decompression
Recommendation | Grade | Level | Level of certainty |
Stand-alone interspinous spacers for indirect decompression are safe and effective for the treatment of mild to moderate lumbar spinal stenosis if no contraindications exist | A | I-A | High |
Percutaneous and Endoscopic Procedures
Recommendation | Grade | Level | Level of certainty |
Microendoscopic Discectomy | B | I-a | High |
Percutaneous Endoscopic Discectomy | B | I-a | High |
Tubular Discectomy | B | I-a | High |
Interspinous/Interlaminar Fusion Devices
Recommendation | Grade | Level | Level of certainty |
ISF can be used as a stand- alone device for decompression. | B | I-B | Moderate |
ISF can be used as a stand- alone device for spinal fusion | C | I-B | Moderate |
ISF is a suitable option to those patients not suited for pedicle screw fixation, non- surgical candidates, and those early in the treatment paradigm | B | I-B | Moderate |
Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Joint Fixation
Recommendation | Grade | Level | Level of certainty |
Minimally Invasive Sacroiliac Fusion | A | I-A | High |
Vertebral Augmentation
Recommendation | Grade | Level | Level of certainty |
Vertebral Augmentation | A | I-A | High |
Spinal Cord Stimulation
Recommendation | Grade | Level | Level of certainty |
SCS following lumbar spinal surgery | A | I-A | Strong |
SCS in the treatment of non-surgical LBP | B | I-C | Moderate |
SCS in the treatment of patients with predominate lumbar spinal stenosis | C | I-C | Moderate |
Intrathecal Drug Delivery Systems
Recommendation | Grade | Level | Level of certainty |
Intrathecal drug delivery is safe and effective in chronic refractory pain of spinal origin. | B | I-B | Moderate |
Intrathecal drug delivery is safe and effective in refractory failed back surgery syndrome. | A | I-A | High |
Intrathecal ziconotide is safe and effective for chronic non-cancer pain management. | A | I-A | High |
Intrathecal opioids are safe and effective in chronic non-cancer pain management. | B | I-B | Moderate |
Intrathecal bupivacaine is safe and effective for chronic non-cancer pain management. | B | I-C | Moderate |
Intrathecal drug delivery can help minimize medication utilization through oral route | B | I-B | Moderate |
Intrathecal combination drug therapy is effective in chronic refractory pain of spinal origin. | B | I-C | Moderate |
Intrathecal drug therapy can help improve function and quality of life in chronic refractory pain of spinal origin. | B | I-C | Moderate |
Intrathecal ziconotide can augment opioid analgesic effect | B | I-B | Moderate |
Intrathecal combination (opioids + local anesthetic ± ziconotide) therapy can prolong the development of intrathecal opioid tolerance | C | I-C | Moderate |
Shared decision making should be utilized if contemplating intrathecal drug therapy in patients with multiple co-morbidities affecting cardiopulmonary function, hematopoietic function, or central nervous function. | A | I-C | Moderate |
Multifidus Activation via Medial Branch Nerve Stimulation
Recommendation | Grade | Level | Level of certainty |
The incidence of serious procedure or device related complications is favorable to other neuromodulation techniques | B | 1-B | Moderate |
Improvements in baseline are clinically significant at both 1 and 2 years after implant in a cohort of patients with severe, disabling chronic LBP | B | 1-B | Moderate |
Improvements in pain and disability increase the longer duration of treatment | B | 1-B | Moderate |
The infection rate of non-coiled leads is 25 times higher than rate for coiled leads | C | I-C | Moderate |
Percutaneous 60 day PNS may provide sustained improvements in pain and function | C | I-C | Moderate |
Percutaneous PNS may reduce or eliminate need for analgesics in individuals with chronic LBP | C | II | Low |
Peripheral Nerve Field Stimulation
Recommendation | Grade | Level | Level of certainty |
PNFS can be considered in patients with chronic axial low back, with and without radicular symptoms in their lower extremities, who have failed other treatment modalities. | C | I-B | Moderate |
Lumbar Radiofrequency Ablation
Recommendation | Grade | Level | Level of certainty |
Conventional radiofrequency ablation is effective for low back pain | A | I-A | High |
Conventional RFA is superior to pulsed RFA | B | I-B | Moderate |
Pulsed RFA is not efficacious | D | I-B | Moderate |
Conventional RFA and cooled RFA are equally efficacious | A | I-A | Strong |
Sacroiliac Radiofrequency Ablation
Recommendation | Grade | Level | Level of certainty |
SI joint denervation/ablation is effective in treatment of SI joint dysfunction pain and is superior to sham in RCT | B | I-A | Strong |
Basivertebral Nerve Ablation
Recommendation | Grade | Level | Level of certainty |
Basivertebral nerve ablation | A | I-A | High |
Tables
Disease Indications for Intrathecal Drug Delivery
Axial neck or back pain (not a surgical candidate) - Multiple compression fractures - Discogenic pain - Spinal stenosis - Diffuse multiple-level spondylosis |
Failed back surgery syndrome/Post-laminectomy syndrome |
Trunk pain - Postherpetic neuralgia - Post-thoracotomy syndromes |
Abdominal/pelvic pain - Visceral - Somatic |
Extremity pain - Radicular - Joint |
Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) |
Cancer pain, primary invasion, metastasis, and treatment (chemotherapy, radiation)-related |
Analgesic efficacy with systemic opioid delivery complicated by intolerable side effects |
Key Considerations for Patient Selection
Contraindications | Indications |
Immunocompromised patients or active infection | Chronic pain with a clear, appropriate diagnosis resulting in significant interference with of ADLs including ability to work and overall QOL |
Severe psychological conditions, including untreated significant addiction; active psychosis; major uncontrolled depression or anxiety; active suicidal or homicidal behavior; severe cognitive deficits; severe sleep disturbances | Has tried and failed to achieve sufficient analgesia with less invasive therapies |
Inability to comply with medication refill schedule | Optimization of all preexisting comorbidities |
Current or anticipated lack of insurance coverage or mean to pay for ongoing management of the pump | Absence of severe or uncontrolled psychological conditions |
Patients in which oral opioid therapy is contraindicated |
Complications Associated with IDDS
- Catheter damaged/severed/nicked/broken/fractured
- Catheter kink/twisting
- Catheter migration
- Catheter occlusion
- Catheter disconnection
- Fluid collection around the catheter
Pump-related
- Motor stall
- Corrosion
- Gear wear
- Pump flipped
- Pump empty/low volume
- Premature battery depletion
- MRI compatibility issues
Drug-related
- Drug withdrawal
- Drug overdose
- Nausea/vomiting
- Diaphoresis
- Pruritus
- Sedation/somnolence/lethargy
- Cardiovascular events
- Respiratory depression
- Edema of lower limbs
- Urinary retention/incontinence
- Sexual dysfunction/hypogonadotropic hypogonadism
- Osteoporosis
- Neuroendocrine dysfunction
- Constipation
- Hyperalgesia or allodynia
- Neuropsychiatric events
Procedural/Biological causes
- Granuloma
- Bleeding/epidural hematoma/spinal hematoma/pocket hematoma
- Meningitis
- Infection/erosion
- CSF leak/hygroma/post dural puncture headache
- Intracranial hypotension
- Seroma
- Allergic reaction
- Pump site discomfort
Recommendation Grading
Overview
Title
Interventional Treatments for Low Back Pain
Authoring Organization
American Society of Pain and Neuroscience
Publication Month/Year
December 5, 2022
Last Updated Month/Year
October 23, 2024
Supplemental Implementation Tools
Document Type
Guideline
Country of Publication
US
Document Objectives
The objective of the American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) Evidence-Based Clinical Guideline for Interventional Treatments of low back pain (LBP) is to provide evidence-based recommendations to address the appropriate utilization of interventional treatments for LBP. This guideline is intended to represent a comprehensive review of the spectrum of interventional treatments for LBP. The guideline is based upon the highest quality of clinical evidence available at the time of publication. The goals of the guideline are to assist clinicians in delivering the highest quality evidenced back interventional treatments, as well as understanding the known risks and complications of interventional treatments. The ASPN Back Guideline is intended to be updated periodically to maintain relevance with the current treatment landscape and empirical literature. Although the guideline represents a comprehensive review of the majority of the interventional treatments for LBP, it is important to note that not all interventional techniques were included. Exclusion of any particular technique does not necessarily suggest that the omitted therapies are inappropriate clinical use. The ASPN Back Guideline does not represent a standard of care. Treatment should be based on an individual patient’s need and the physician’s professional judgement and experience. This guideline is not intended to be used as the sole reason for denial or approval of treatment or services.
Target Patient Population
Patients with low back pain (LBP)
Target Provider Population
HCPs treating patients with LBP. This includes physicians from the core specialties of anesthesiology, neurosurgery, physical medicine and rehabilitation, and radiology.
Inclusion Criteria
Male, Female, Adolescent, Older adult
Health Care Settings
Ambulatory, Outpatient, Radiology services
Intended Users
Nurse, nurse practitioner, physical therapist, physician, physician assistant
Scope
Treatment, Management, Rehabilitation
Diseases/Conditions (MeSH)
D017116 - Low Back Pain
Keywords
low back pain, low back pain (LBP), LBP
Source Citation
Sayed D, Grider J, Strand N, Hagedorn JM, Falowski S, Lam CM, Tieppo Francio V, Beall DP, Tomycz ND, Davanzo JR, Aiyer R, Lee DW, Kalia H, Sheen S, Malinowski MN, Verdolin M, Vodapally S, Carayannopoulos A, Jain S, Azeem N, Tolba R, Chang Chien GC, Ghosh P, Mazzola AJ, Amirdelfan K, Chakravarthy K, Petersen E, Schatman ME, Deer T. The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) Evidence-Based Clinical Guideline of Interventional Treatments for Low Back Pain. J Pain Res. 2022;15:3729-3832
https://doi.org/10.2147/JPR.S386879