BACKGROUND: Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain is an under-recognized condition. Substantial information supports the safety and effectiveness of SIJ fusion (SIJF). Long-term follow-up after SIJF has not been reported. OBJECTIVE: To determine responses to conservative management (CM), SIJ denervation, and SIJF in patients with SIJ pain unresponsive to CM. METHODS: Retrospective study with long-term (up to 6 yr) follow-up of 137 patients with SIJ pain seen in an outpatient neurosurgery clinic who received either CM (n = 63), sacroiliac denervation (n = 47), or minimally invasive SIJF (n = 27). At each routine clinic visit, patients completed pain scores and Oswestry Disability Index. Additional data were extracted from medical charts. RESULTS: Patients treated with continued CM had no long-term improvement in pain (mean worsening of 1 point) or disability (mean Oswestry Disability Index worsened by 4-6 points), increased their use of opioids, and had poor long-term work status. SIJF patients had large improvements in SIJ pain (mean 6 points), large improvements in disability (mean 25 points), a decrease in opioid use, and good final work status. Sacroiliac denervation patients had intermediate responses (0-1 and 1-2 points, respectively). CONCLUSION: In patients with SIJ pain unresponsive to CM, SIJF resulted in excellent long-term clinical responses, with low opioid use and better work status compared to other treatments.

Background: measuring intracranial pressure (ICP) is considered the gold standard of care for brain injury. While supratentorial ICP monitoring has been adopted everywhere, posterior fossa ICP monitoring is rarely performed. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the feasibility of inserting ICP sensors into the posterior fossa of cadavers, to measure ICP in the posterior fossa. Methods: An ICP sensor was transcranially implanted into the posterior fossa of fifteen fresh adult cadavers. An extracranial point was defined in the retroauricular area 2 cm behind the tip of the mastoid process and 2 cm below the transverse sinus, in order to implant an ICP probe. The cranial cavity was opened and measures were taken of the distance that the ICP sensor had penetrated inside the posterior fossa, as well as the distance to nearby venous sinuses (lateral, transverse, sigmoid, inferior petrosal sinus, and jugular bulb). The cerebellar hemisphere was searched for any possible damage. Results: the selected extracranial point (2 cm behind the tip of the mastoid process and 2 cm below the transverse sinus) was a safe location. Intracranial structures such as the brainstem and the cerebellar hemisphere were not damaged. The implanted ICP probe was at least 2 cm away from the venous sinuses, which were not damaged. Conclusion: ICP monitoring is safe and reliable at the described ICP probe placement site of the posterior fossa.