Is conventional radiofrequency ablation of the superolateral branch, one of the three genicular nerves targeted as standard, necessary or not? A non-inferiority randomized controlled trial


Albayrak O., ŞANAL TOPRAK C., GÜNDÜZ O. H., ŞENCAN S.

Korean Journal of Pain, cilt.37, sa.3, ss.264-274, 2024 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 37 Sayı: 3
  • Basım Tarihi: 2024
  • Doi Numarası: 10.3344/kjp.24098
  • Dergi Adı: Korean Journal of Pain
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, Academic Search Premier, Directory of Open Access Journals
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.264-274
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: Chronic Pain, Denervation, Fluoroscopy, Knee Osteoarthritis, Pain Management, Radiofrequency Ablation
  • Marmara Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

Background: Radiofrequency ablation is an effective treatment modality in the symptomatic treatment of knee osteoarthritis. Our aim was to compare the efficacy of radiofrequency ablation of the superomedial and inferomedia genicular nerves (2 branches) with the superolateral, superomedial, and inferomedial genicular nerves (3 branches) and to show whether the 2-branch procedure is inferior to the 3-branch procedure. Methods: This study is a prospective, randomized, single-blind clinical study. Eligible participants were randomized into 2 groups: group A, which applied the procedure to the superomedial and inferomedial genicular nerves, and group B, which applied it to the superomedial, superolateral and inferomedial genicular nerves. Pain was evaluated with the numerical rating scale, quality of life with the Short Form-36 (SF-36), and disability with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Index before, and at 1 and 3 months after the procedure. Results: A total of 41 patients were included. There were no differences between the groups except for the SF-36 physical health sub-score at baseline. A significant improvement was seen in the numeric rating scale (NRS) score, SF-36 sub-scores, WOMAC Index total, as well as pain and physical function scores in both groups, though no significant difference was detected between the groups during follow-up. Conclusions: Although we were unable to establish the noninferiority of conventional radiofrequency ablation (CRFA) applied to 2 branches to CRFA applied to 3 branches, in this trial, significant and similar improvement was observed in NRS, WOMAC total, pain, and physical function and SF-36 scores in both groups.