Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Cooled and traditional thermal radiofrequency ablation of genicular nerves in patients with chronic knee pain: a comparative outcomes analysis.
Wu, Bernie P; Grits, Daniel; Foorsov, Victor; Xu, Jijun; Tankha, Pavan; Bolash, Robert B.
Affiliation
  • Wu BP; Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine of Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA wup@ccf.org.
  • Grits D; Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine of Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
  • Foorsov V; Department of Orthopedic Surgery/Regional Medical Group, Northwestern Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
  • Xu J; Department of Pain Management, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
  • Tankha P; Center for Comprehensive Pain Recovery, Neurological Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
  • Bolash RB; Department of Anesthesiology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Reg Anesth Pain Med ; 2022 Aug 03.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35922077
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

Genicular nerve radiofrequency ablation (GNRFA) is a minimally invasive intervention for patients with chronic knee pain (CKP) not responding to conservative treatments. Few investigations have compared treatment outcomes of cooled-RFA (c-RFA) and thermal-RFA (t-RFA), two common approaches of GNRFA. This study aims to investigate and compare outcomes, including probability of treatment success, between c-RFA and t-RFA in patients with CKP.

METHODS:

This retrospective cohort study analyzed a total of 208 propensity score matched patients, including 104 patients who received c-RFA and 104 patients who received t-RFA. The primary outcome was probability of pain relief after the procedure, defined as reduction in Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) pain score of 2 or greater. The secondary outcomes were degree of NRS pain score reductions, duration of relief, and the probability of patients receiving TKA within 1 year of treatment.

RESULTS:

T-RFA was associated with a higher probability of pain relief within 1, 3, and 6 months after procedure when compared with c-RFA. Probabilities of pain relief from t-RFA and c-RFA were 62% (95% CI 51% to 71%) and 43% (95% CI 34% to 53%; p=0.01) within 1 month, 78% (95% CI 68% to 85%) and 55% (95% CI 45% to 64%; p<0.001) within 3 months, and 79% (95% CI 70% to 86%) and 59% (95% CI 49% to 68%; p<0.01) within 6 months, respectively. t-RFA was also associated with greater mean NRS pain score reduction at 1 month after procedure -4.71 (95% CI -5.3 to -4.1) when compared with -3.59 (95% CI -4.3 to -2.9; p=0.02) from c-RFA. T-RFA and c-RFA were comparable in pain score reduction at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months after procedure. Both groups demonstrated comparable duration of relief and probability of patients receiving TKA within 1 year.

DISCUSSION:

Both t-RFA and c-RFA effectively reduced NRS pain scores in most patients with CKP within the 1 year follow-up period. Genicular nerve t-RFA was associated with a higher probability of treatment success and a greater degree of pain relief at 1 month after the procedure when compared with c-RFA in propensity score matched patients with CKP.
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Type of study: Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Language: En Journal: Reg Anesth Pain Med Journal subject: ANESTESIOLOGIA / NEUROLOGIA / PSICOFISIOLOGIA Year: 2022 Document type: Article Affiliation country: United States

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Type of study: Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Language: En Journal: Reg Anesth Pain Med Journal subject: ANESTESIOLOGIA / NEUROLOGIA / PSICOFISIOLOGIA Year: 2022 Document type: Article Affiliation country: United States