The Analgesic Effectiveness of Genicular Nerve-targeted Cooled and Pulsed Radiofrequency Ablation for Osteoarthritis Knee Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

IF 2.6 2区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY Pain physician Pub Date : 2024-09-01
Bintang Soetjahjo, Denny Adriansyah, Mochammadsyah Beizar Yudistira, Alif Noeriyanto Rahman, Herry Herman, Sudhir Diwan
{"title":"The Analgesic Effectiveness of Genicular Nerve-targeted Cooled and Pulsed Radiofrequency Ablation for Osteoarthritis Knee Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.","authors":"Bintang Soetjahjo, Denny Adriansyah, Mochammadsyah Beizar Yudistira, Alif Noeriyanto Rahman, Herry Herman, Sudhir Diwan","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a form of therapy for knee osteoarthritis (OA) pain that has become more popular in recent years. In addition to standard RF approaches, there are cooled and pulsed options. RFA could be used to treat the superolateral, superomedial, and inferomedial branches of the genicular nerves. Pulsed and cooled RF ablation on the genicular nerve to treat knee OA pain, however, has not yet been shown to be effective.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We conducted a meta-analysis to assess nonconventional, pulsed or cooled, RFA on the genicular nerve to treat knee OA pain; intended our study to provide useful information in deciding whether to use nonconventional RFA because of its effectiveness.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Meta-analysis study of nonconventional, pulsed or cooled, RFA on the genicular nerve to treat knee OA pain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane Central were searched for eligible papers. In our literature review, procedures, posttreatment outcomes, follow-up data, and adverse events were compiled and analyzed from the selected studies. The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Quality Assessment tool was used to assess therapeutic relevance and evidence strength. Our meta-analysis analyzed pre- and posttreatment pain and physical function scores. The primary outcome was pain measured with either the Visual Analog Scale  or the Numeric Rating Scale. The secondary outcome was physical function measured with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our systematic review and meta-analysis includes 11 eligible publications (604 patients). Both cooled and pulsed RFA procedures targeting the genicular nerve resulted in considerable pain reduction at post one, 3, 6, and 12 months (P < 0.005). There was no significant improvement in physical function outcome for the cooled RFA technique in all follow-up visits. There was a significant improvement in physical function outcome for the pulsed RFA technique at the one-month and 3-month follow-up visits.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Limitations include that there are a limited number of randomized controlled trials available, the methodology utilized for comparison is based on the change in outcome between baseline and follow-up visits. There are only a few papers that have reported physical function outcomes in complete WOMAC rating data.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>At the 6-month follow-up, both cooled and pulsed RFA targeting the genicular nerve provided significant osteoarthritic pain alleviation. There is no different in pain relief between cooled and pulsed RFA targeting the genicular nerve for treating knee osteoarthritis. There was no significant functional improvement of cooled RFA in all follow-ups, but there was a significant functional improvement of pulsed RFA up to 3-month follow-up. According to our study, knee osteoarthritis pain can be efficiently treated with pulsed and cooled radiofrequency with few adverse effects.</p>","PeriodicalId":19841,"journal":{"name":"Pain physician","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain physician","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a form of therapy for knee osteoarthritis (OA) pain that has become more popular in recent years. In addition to standard RF approaches, there are cooled and pulsed options. RFA could be used to treat the superolateral, superomedial, and inferomedial branches of the genicular nerves. Pulsed and cooled RF ablation on the genicular nerve to treat knee OA pain, however, has not yet been shown to be effective.

Objectives: We conducted a meta-analysis to assess nonconventional, pulsed or cooled, RFA on the genicular nerve to treat knee OA pain; intended our study to provide useful information in deciding whether to use nonconventional RFA because of its effectiveness.

Study design: Meta-analysis study of nonconventional, pulsed or cooled, RFA on the genicular nerve to treat knee OA pain.

Methods: PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane Central were searched for eligible papers. In our literature review, procedures, posttreatment outcomes, follow-up data, and adverse events were compiled and analyzed from the selected studies. The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Quality Assessment tool was used to assess therapeutic relevance and evidence strength. Our meta-analysis analyzed pre- and posttreatment pain and physical function scores. The primary outcome was pain measured with either the Visual Analog Scale  or the Numeric Rating Scale. The secondary outcome was physical function measured with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score.

Results: Our systematic review and meta-analysis includes 11 eligible publications (604 patients). Both cooled and pulsed RFA procedures targeting the genicular nerve resulted in considerable pain reduction at post one, 3, 6, and 12 months (P < 0.005). There was no significant improvement in physical function outcome for the cooled RFA technique in all follow-up visits. There was a significant improvement in physical function outcome for the pulsed RFA technique at the one-month and 3-month follow-up visits.

Limitations: Limitations include that there are a limited number of randomized controlled trials available, the methodology utilized for comparison is based on the change in outcome between baseline and follow-up visits. There are only a few papers that have reported physical function outcomes in complete WOMAC rating data.

Conclusion: At the 6-month follow-up, both cooled and pulsed RFA targeting the genicular nerve provided significant osteoarthritic pain alleviation. There is no different in pain relief between cooled and pulsed RFA targeting the genicular nerve for treating knee osteoarthritis. There was no significant functional improvement of cooled RFA in all follow-ups, but there was a significant functional improvement of pulsed RFA up to 3-month follow-up. According to our study, knee osteoarthritis pain can be efficiently treated with pulsed and cooled radiofrequency with few adverse effects.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
以膝神经为靶点的冷却和脉冲射频消融术对骨关节炎膝关节疼痛的镇痛效果:系统回顾和元分析。
背景:射频消融(RFA)是一种治疗膝关节骨性关节炎(OA)疼痛的方法,近年来越来越受欢迎。除标准射频方法外,还有冷却和脉冲方法。射频消融可用于治疗膝关节神经的上外侧、上内侧和下内侧分支。然而,脉冲和冷却射频消融治疗膝关节 OA 疼痛的效果尚未得到证实:我们进行了一项荟萃分析,以评估用于治疗膝关节 OA 疼痛的非常规、脉冲或冷却的膝关节神经射频消融术;我们的研究旨在为决定是否使用非常规射频消融术提供有用信息,因为它非常有效:研究设计:非传统、脉冲或冷却的膝神经RFA治疗膝关节OA疼痛的Meta分析研究:方法:在 PubMed、Ovid MEDLINE、Scopus 和 Cochrane Central 上搜索符合条件的论文。在我们的文献综述中,我们对所选研究的程序、治疗后结果、随访数据和不良事件进行了汇编和分析。美国国家心肺血液研究所质量评估工具用于评估治疗相关性和证据强度。我们的荟萃分析分析了治疗前后的疼痛和身体功能评分。主要结果是用视觉模拟量表或数字评分量表测量的疼痛。次要结果是身体功能,采用西安大略和麦克马斯特大学骨关节炎指数(WOMAC)评分:我们的系统综述和荟萃分析包括 11 篇符合条件的出版物(604 名患者)。以膝神经为靶点的冷冻和脉冲射频消融术都能在术后1、3、6和12个月显著减轻疼痛(P < 0.005)。在所有随访中,冷却 RFA 技术的身体功能结果均无明显改善。脉冲 RFA 技术在一个月和三个月的随访中对身体功能有明显改善:局限性:可用的随机对照试验数量有限,用于比较的方法基于基线和随访之间的结果变化。只有少数论文报告了完整的WOMAC评分数据中的身体功能结果:结论:在 6 个月的随访中,针对膝神经的冷却和脉冲 RFA 都能显著缓解骨关节炎疼痛。在治疗膝关节骨性关节炎方面,针对膝关节神经的冷却和脉冲 RFA 在缓解疼痛方面没有差异。冷冻射频消融术在所有随访中都没有明显的功能改善,但脉冲射频消融术在3个月的随访中有明显的功能改善。根据我们的研究,脉冲射频和冷却射频可有效治疗膝关节骨性关节炎疼痛,且不良反应较少。
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
Pain physician
Pain physician CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
21.60%
发文量
234
期刊介绍: Pain Physician Journal is the official publication of the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP). The open access journal is published 6 times a year. Pain Physician Journal is a peer-reviewed, multi-disciplinary, open access journal written by and directed to an audience of interventional pain physicians, clinicians and basic scientists with an interest in interventional pain management and pain medicine. Pain Physician Journal presents the latest studies, research, and information vital to those in the emerging specialty of interventional pain management – and critical to the people they serve.
期刊最新文献
Delineating the Hurtful, Engaging, Emotive, and Directive (HEED) Dimensions of Pain. Characterization for Clinical Relevance. Effectiveness Analysis of Awake Computed Tomography-Guided Double-Needle Percutaneous Radiofrequency Thermocoagulation for the Treatment of Glossopharyngeal Neuralgia. Efficacy Analysis of Temporary Spinal Cord Stimulation in the Treatment of Refractory Postherpetic Neuralgia. Erector Spinae Plane Block Provided Comparable Analgesia as Thoracic Paravertebral Block Post Pediatric Nuss Procedure for Pectus Excavatum: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Extended vs. Traditional Operating Table in C-Arm-Guided Percutaneous Balloon Compression of the Gasserian Ganglion for Trigeminal Neuralgia: A Prospective 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