Cooled versus conventional radiofrequency treatment of the genicular nerves for chronic knee pain: 12-month and cost-effectiveness results from the multicenter COCOGEN trial

Amy Belba, Thibaut Vanneste, Jan Willem Kallewaard, Sander MJ van Kuijk, Marloes Gelissen, Peter Emans, Johan Bellemans, Kristof Smeets, Koen Van Boxem, Micha Sommer, Merel Kimman, Jan Van Zundert
{"title":"Cooled versus conventional radiofrequency treatment of the genicular nerves for chronic knee pain: 12-month and cost-effectiveness results from the multicenter COCOGEN trial","authors":"Amy Belba, Thibaut Vanneste, Jan Willem Kallewaard, Sander MJ van Kuijk, Marloes Gelissen, Peter Emans, Johan Bellemans, Kristof Smeets, Koen Van Boxem, Micha Sommer, Merel Kimman, Jan Van Zundert","doi":"10.1136/rapm-2023-105127","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Radiofrequency (RF) treatment of the genicular nerves reduces chronic knee pain in patients with osteoarthritis (OA) or persistent postsurgical pain (PPSP) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The objective of this study is to compare long-term outcomes of cooled and conventional RF and perform an economic evaluation. Methods The COCOGEN trial is a double-blinded, non-inferiority, pilot, randomized controlled trial that compared the effects up to 12 months of cooled and conventional RF in patients with chronic knee pain suffering from OA or PPSP after TKA following a 1:1 randomization rate. Outcomes were knee pain, functionality, quality of life, emotional health, medication use, and adverse events. A trial-based economic evaluation was performed with a 12-month societal perspective. Here, the primary outcome was the incremental costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Results 41 of the 49 included patients completed the 12-month follow-up. One patient in the PPSP cooled RF group had substantial missing data at 12-month follow-up. The proportion of patients with ≥50% pain reduction at 12 months was 22.2% (4/18) in patients treated with conventional RF versus 22.7% (5/22) in patients treated with cooled RF (p>0.05). There was a statistically significant difference in the mean absolute numerical rating scale at 12 months after cooled RF and conventional RF in patients with PPSP (p=0.02). Differences between other outcomes were not statistically significant. The health economic analysis indicated that cooled RF resulted in lower costs and improved QALYs compared with conventional RF in PPSP but not in OA. There were no serious adverse events. Conclusions Both RF treatments demonstrated in approximately 22% of patients a ≥50% pain reduction at 12 months. In patients with PPSP, contrary to OA, cooled RF seems to be more effective than conventional RF. Additionally, cooled RF has in patients with PPSP, as opposed to OA, greater effectiveness at lower costs compared with conventional RF. Trial registration number [NCT03865849][1]. Data are available upon reasonable request. [1]: /lookup/external-ref?link_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT03865849&atom=%2Frapm%2Fearly%2F2024%2F02%2F21%2Frapm-2023-105127.atom","PeriodicalId":21046,"journal":{"name":"Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/rapm-2023-105127","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background Radiofrequency (RF) treatment of the genicular nerves reduces chronic knee pain in patients with osteoarthritis (OA) or persistent postsurgical pain (PPSP) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The objective of this study is to compare long-term outcomes of cooled and conventional RF and perform an economic evaluation. Methods The COCOGEN trial is a double-blinded, non-inferiority, pilot, randomized controlled trial that compared the effects up to 12 months of cooled and conventional RF in patients with chronic knee pain suffering from OA or PPSP after TKA following a 1:1 randomization rate. Outcomes were knee pain, functionality, quality of life, emotional health, medication use, and adverse events. A trial-based economic evaluation was performed with a 12-month societal perspective. Here, the primary outcome was the incremental costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Results 41 of the 49 included patients completed the 12-month follow-up. One patient in the PPSP cooled RF group had substantial missing data at 12-month follow-up. The proportion of patients with ≥50% pain reduction at 12 months was 22.2% (4/18) in patients treated with conventional RF versus 22.7% (5/22) in patients treated with cooled RF (p>0.05). There was a statistically significant difference in the mean absolute numerical rating scale at 12 months after cooled RF and conventional RF in patients with PPSP (p=0.02). Differences between other outcomes were not statistically significant. The health economic analysis indicated that cooled RF resulted in lower costs and improved QALYs compared with conventional RF in PPSP but not in OA. There were no serious adverse events. Conclusions Both RF treatments demonstrated in approximately 22% of patients a ≥50% pain reduction at 12 months. In patients with PPSP, contrary to OA, cooled RF seems to be more effective than conventional RF. Additionally, cooled RF has in patients with PPSP, as opposed to OA, greater effectiveness at lower costs compared with conventional RF. Trial registration number [NCT03865849][1]. Data are available upon reasonable request. [1]: /lookup/external-ref?link_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT03865849&atom=%2Frapm%2Fearly%2F2024%2F02%2F21%2Frapm-2023-105127.atom
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
针对慢性膝关节疼痛的膝神经冷却射频治疗与传统射频治疗:多中心 COCOGEN 试验的 12 个月结果和成本效益分析
背景 射频(RF)治疗膝关节神经可减轻骨关节炎(OA)患者或全膝关节置换术(TKA)后持续性手术后疼痛(PPSP)患者的慢性膝关节疼痛。本研究的目的是比较冷冻射频和传统射频的长期疗效,并进行经济评估。方法 COCOGEN 试验是一项双盲、非劣效、试验性随机对照试验,按照 1:1 的随机分配比例,比较了冷却射频和传统射频治疗 TKA 后 OA 或 PPSP 慢性膝关节疼痛患者长达 12 个月的效果。结果包括膝关节疼痛、功能、生活质量、情绪健康、药物使用和不良事件。以试验为基础,从 12 个月的社会角度进行了经济评估。主要结果是每质量调整生命年(QALY)的增量成本。结果 49 位纳入患者中有 41 位完成了 12 个月的随访。PPSP 冷却射频组中有一名患者在 12 个月随访时有大量数据缺失。12个月时疼痛减轻≥50%的患者比例为:接受传统射频治疗的患者为22.2%(4/18),而接受冷却射频治疗的患者为22.7%(5/22)(P>0.05)。在 PPSP 患者中,冷却射频和传统射频治疗后 12 个月的平均绝对数字评分表差异有统计学意义(p=0.02)。其他结果之间的差异无统计学意义。健康经济分析表明,与传统射频相比,冷却射频治疗 PPSP 可降低成本,提高 QALYs,但对 OA 无效。没有出现严重不良事件。结论 两种射频疗法均可使约 22% 的患者在 12 个月内疼痛减轻≥50%。与 OA 相反,在 PPSP 患者中,冷却射频似乎比传统射频更有效。此外,与传统射频疗法相比,冷却射频疗法对PPSP患者的疗效更好,成本更低。试验注册号[NCT03865849][1]。如有合理要求,可提供相关数据。[1]:/lookup/external-ref?link_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT03865849&atom=%2Frapm%2Fearly%2F2024%2F02%2F21%2Frapm-2023-105127.atom
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Optimal techniques of ultrasound-guided superficial and deep parasternal intercostal plane blocks—a cadaveric study Multimodal analgesia and the erector spinae plane block in a rapid recovery pathway after posterior spinal fusion in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a randomized controlled study of practicality In reply: evaluating the efficacy of PENG and SIFICB in hip fracture analgesia – a critical analysis Invited reply letter: optimal techniques of ultrasound-guided superficial and deep parasternal intercostal plane blocks – a cadaveric study Postoperative epidural analgesia and outcomes following pediatric bilateral lung and heart-lung transplantation: a retrospective observational study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1