Cervical facet joints (CFJs) are a frequent source of neck pain, contributing to both localized and referred pain patterns. However, diagnosis remains difficult owing to the nonspecific nature of the clinical findings and limited accuracy of current diagnostic methods. Among available approaches, diagnostic blocks with local anesthetics are considered the most reliable technique for identifying CFJ-mediated pain. Although various treatment strategies are available for managing pain, including pharmacologic, rehabilitative, and surgical approaches, this review focuses on interventional treatment modalities. While these techniques are widely used in clinical settings, they show variable outcomes across studies. The anatomical complexity of the cervical spine and its proximity to critical neurovascular structures demand a high level of anatomical understanding and procedural expertise. This review outlines the key anatomical, technical, and clinical considerations for CFJ interventions. It also summarizes current evidence regarding their diagnostic and therapeutic utility within the context of pain management. Given the limitations in diagnostic certainty and variability in treatment response, interventional procedures should be applied using an anatomically guided and evidence-based approach to optimize patient care.

Background: : This study aimed to identify exact anatomical landmarks and ideal injection volumes for safe adductor canal blocks (ACB). Methods: : Fifty thighs from 25 embalmed adult Korean cadavers were used. The measurement baseline was the line connecting the anterior superior iliac spine (ASIS) to the midpoint of the patellar base. All target points were measured perpendicular to the baseline. The relevant cadaveric structures were observed using ultrasound (US) and confirmed in living individuals. US-guided dye injection was performed to determine the ideal volume. Results: : The apex of the femoral triangle was 25.3 ± 2.2 cm distal to the ASIS on the baseline and 5.3 ± 1.0 cm perpendicular to that point. The midpoint of the superior border of the vasto-adductor membrane (VAM) was 27.4 ± 2.0 cm distal to the ASIS on the baseline and 5.0 ± 1.1 cm perpendicular to that point. The VAM had a trapezoidal shape and was connected as an aponeurosis between the medial edge of the vastus medialis muscle and lateral edge of the adductor magnus muscle. The nerve to the vastus medialis penetrated the muscle proximal to the superior border of the VAM in 70% of specimens. The VAM appeared on US as a hyperechoic area connecting the vastus medialis and adductor magnus muscles between the sartorius muscle and femoral artery. Conclusions: : Confirming the crucial landmark, the VAM, is beneficial when performing ACB. It is advisable to insert the needle obliquely below the superior VAM border, and a 5 mL injection is considered sufficient.