Background
Clinical outcomes following lumbar medial branch radiofrequency ablation (RFA) have been inconsistent. One possible reason is less-than-optimal placement of the electrode along the medial branch at the lateral neck of superior articular process (SAP). Needle angles that define optimal placement (i.e., parallel to the medial branch) may be helpful for consistent technical performance of RFA. Despite its importance, there is a lack of anatomical studies that quantify RFA needle placement angles.
Objective
To quantify and compare needle angles to achieve parallel placement along the medial branch as it courses on the middle two-quarters of the lateral neck of the SAP at the L1-L5 vertebrae.
Design
Osteological Study
Methods
Ten lumbar vertebral columns were used in this study. Needles were placed along the periosteum of the middle two-quarters of the lateral neck of SAP. Mean needle angles for L1-L5 were quantified and compared using posterior (n = 100) and lateral (n = 100) photographs.
Results
Mean needle angles varied ranging from 29.29 ± 17.82° to 47.22 ± 16.27° lateral to the parasagittal plane (posterior view) and 33.53 ± 10.23° to 49.19 ± 10.69° caudal to the superior vertebral endplate (lateral view). Significant differences in mean angles were found between: L1/L3 (p =0.008), L1/L4 (p=0.003), and L1/L5 (p=0.040) in the posterior view and L1/L3 (p=0.042), L1/L4 (p<0.001), L1/L5 (p<0.001), L2/L4 (p=0.004), and L2/L5 (p=0.004) in lateral view.
Conclusions
Variability of needle angles suggest a standard “one-size-fits-all” approach may not be the optimal technique. Future research is necessary to determine optimal patient-specific needle angles from a more detailed and granular analysis of fluoroscopic landmarks.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.