A comparison of efficacy among different radiofrequency ablation techniques for the treatment of lumbar facet joint and sacroiliac joint pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Shih, Chia-Lung; Shen, Po-Chih; Lu, Cheng‐Chang; Liu, Zi–Miao; Tien, Yin-Chun; Huang, Peng‐Ju; Chou, Shih-Hsiang

doi:10.1016/j.clineuro.2020.105854

Cited by 32 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A systematic review showed that the 3 techniques have an effect for at least 6 months, with no significant difference among them (11). In the present study, there was also an analgesic effect with all 3 RF types with no significant difference among the 3.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 53%

Retrospective Study of the Analgesic Effect of Sacroiliac Joint Radiofrequency Denervation

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Interventional radiofrequency (RF) ablation techniques are indicated when an adequate effect is not obtained with conservative measures. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this study was to evaluate pain relief after RF denervation of the sacroiliac joint. The secondary objective was to evaluate pain intensity and relief duration. STUDY DESIGN: The study was retrospective. SETTING: The study was conducted at Vera Cruz Hospital, Campinas, Brazil. METHODS: Data were collected from the medical records of patients undergoing RF denervation for low back pain originating in the sacroiliac joint, from January 2015 to December 2017. There were 78 patients studied, between 18 and 65 years old, of both genders, ASA I or II, who underwent knee arthroscopic meniscectomy. The patients were submitted to denervation of sacroiliac joint by 3 types of RF (conventional, pulsed, and cooled). The following parameters were evaluated, number of patients who obtained ? 50% pain relief; pain intensity, measured using the visual analog scale (before the procedure and 15, 30, 90 and 180 days after, performed by the same evaluator); and the use of complementary analgesic for 2 weeks. RESULTS: Of the 78 included patients, 56 (71.8%) underwent conventional RF, 9 (11.5%) underwent pulsed RF, and 13 (16.7%) underwent cooled RF. There were losses to follow-up including 40 patients who underwent conventional RF, 5 who underwent pulsed RF, and 12 who underwent cooled RF, who were retained for 6 months. There was significant pain relief with the three types of RF for up to 6 months of follow-up, with no difference among the types. After 6 months, 90.2% of patients who underwent conventional RF, 100% who underwent pulsed RF, and 91.7% who underwent cooled RF maintained ? 50% pain relief. Complementary analgesics were used by 95% of the patients who underwent conventional RF, 80% who underwent pulsed RF, and 91% who underwent cooled RF 2 weeks after the procedure. There were mild adverse effects, such as edema, hematoma, and local pain, without complications. LIMITATIONS: As for limitations, the number of pulsed and cooled RF is low and in a retrospective study some data may be missing, especially from follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: RF denervation of the sacroiliac joint is effective and promotes a long-lasting analgesic effect. KEY WORDS: Analgesia, denervation, low back pain, radiofrequency, sacroiliac joint

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 53%

Retrospective Study of the Analgesic Effect of Sacroiliac Joint Radiofrequency Denervation

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In our opinion, it is important to have a correct diagnostic block to confirm imaging data and clinical suspicion, even if this is not always easy to perform in clinical practice. According to recent results, CRF seems to be more effective than PRF [15][16][17][18][19]. CRF has been used for approximately 40 years for various medical conditions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…From the available evidence, CRF is used in the management of lumbar facet joint pain. PRF is a promising technique: it is effective for a short period in the medial branch block performed due to lumbar facet joint pain, but its effectivity is weaker compared to CRF [15][16][17][18][19].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to recent results, CRF seems to be more effective than PRF [ 15 – 19 ]. CRF has been used for approximately 40 years for various medical conditions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nowadays, there are conflicting opinions on the use of this technique. In some studies, there is evidence of very low to moderate quality supporting the effectiveness of PRF for patients with chronic LBP [ 15 – 19 ]. In others, PRF stimulation seems to be an effective technique for controlling pain in joint disorders including LBP [ 20 , 21 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Pulsed Radiofrequency for Lumbar Facet Joint Pain: A Viable Therapeutic Option? A Retrospective Observational Study

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Low back pain (LBP) is a common problem, and facet joint pain is responsible for 15-45% of cases. Treatment is multidisciplinary, and when conservative measures are not sufficient, radiofrequency (RF) is often used. It allows the interruption of nociceptive input, producing a heat lesion in a continuous or pulsed mode. Methods: Medical records of 60 patients who underwent pulsed RF denervation were examined. The standard procedure provided followup of pain intensity. Numerical rating scale (NRS) and Douleur Neuropathique en 4 Questions (DN4) were recorded before treatment, and 15 and 40 days, and 6 months after treatment. Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and patient satisfaction were also recorded. Successful treatment was defined as more than a 50% reduction in the NRS scores at 6 months compared with pretreatment scores. Results: Scores on the NRS and DN4 were statistically different over time (p \ 0.05). Scores at 6 months were significantly decreased when compared with pretreatment scores (p \ 0.05). ODI scores decreased during the follow-up period. No adverse effect was recorded and 57 patients (97%) reported successful pain relief. Conclusions: Continuous RF is the gold standard in the management of lumbar facet joint pain. Pulsed RF is a promising technique: patients with chronic LBP who had not responded to conservative care tended to improve after pulsed RF. The procedure was well tolerated in the absence of contraindications, and reliable if the nerve endings regrew.

show abstract

Sacroiliac Joint

Heros¹,

Ciccone²,

Kroopf³

et al. 2021

Essentials of Radiofrequency Ablation of the Spine and Joints

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A comparison of efficacy among different radiofrequency ablation techniques for the treatment of lumbar facet joint and sacroiliac joint pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Cited by 32 publications

References 34 publications

Retrospective Study of the Analgesic Effect of Sacroiliac Joint Radiofrequency Denervation

Retrospective Study of the Analgesic Effect of Sacroiliac Joint Radiofrequency Denervation

Pulsed Radiofrequency for Lumbar Facet Joint Pain: A Viable Therapeutic Option? A Retrospective Observational Study

Sacroiliac Joint

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About