METHODS A retrospective case-series of revision sacroiliac joint (SIJ) fusions. OBJECTIVE To provide a technique guide for revision minimally invasive SIJ fusion. BACKGROUND SIJ dysfunction is a prevalent, yet underdiagnosed condition. This disparity exists as a result of diagnostic complexity and lack of a viable surgical treatment option. However, the advent of minimally invasive SIJ fusion has created a resurgence of interest in this debilitating condition. Multiple studies have reported on the increased use of minimally invasive SIJ fusion in recent years, but there is a paucity of literature on management in a revision setting. METHODS A case series of 5 patients from a single academic tertiary referral center over a 3-year period will serve to highlight technical pearls and considerations in SIJ fusion revision. Revision SIJ fusions were identified through a retrospective review of a surgical database and demographic, surgical, and radiographic data were obtained through review of the electronic medical record. RESULTS Five patients underwent SIJ fusion revision from 2015 to 2018. There were 3 main modes of failure, with indications for revision including nerve root irritation and SIJ pain recurrence. The mean age at time of revision was 48.8 ± 14.3 years, and the mean follow-up after revision was 2.0 + 0.9 years. Familiarity with SIJ anatomy and use of stereotactic navigation can improve implant position and purchase. Additionally, bone graft and bone morphogenetic protein can be used to fill in old implant tracks and to augment bony ingrowth and ongrowth of new implants. CONCLUSIONS Increased use of SIJ fusion creates a demand for comprehensive revision strategies and necessitates familiarity with SIJ anatomy. Preoperative planning to determine causes of failure and use of intraoperative navigation are essential to help surgeons better understand the preferential trajectory for each implant. METHODS 4.