Effectiveness of Genicular Nerve Cooled Radiofrequency Ablation on Chronic Knee Osteoarthritis Pain

J. Carrier
{"title":"Effectiveness of Genicular Nerve Cooled Radiofrequency Ablation\non Chronic Knee Osteoarthritis Pain","authors":"J. Carrier","doi":"10.36076/pmcr.2019/3/83","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Outside of an invasive total knee\narthroplasty, the available therapies for the treatment\nof pain secondary to knee osteoarthritis\n(OA) provide marginal and short-lived symptomatic\nrelief. Genicular nerve radiofrequency\nablation (RFA) serves as an alternative treatment\nmodality for OA-associated knee pain and\ndisability.\nObjectives: To quantify the effectiveness of\ncooled radiofrequency ablation (C-RFA) of the\ngenicular nerves for chronic knee pain secondary\nto OA.\nStudy Design: Retrospective chart review\nperformed using Redcap, implementing current\nprocedural terminology codes.\nSetting: An academic pain management center.\nMethods: Study population included patients\ntreated with C-RFA from April 2015 through June\n2017. Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) data were\nanalyzed at 3 time points: 2 weeks, 4-6 weeks,\nand 7-33 weeks post-RFA (extended follow-up).\nPrimary outcome for statistical analysis was NRS\nand the change in NRS from baseline at each\nof the 3 predetermined time points. Differences\nbetween the change in NRS and the number of\ndiagnostic blocks performed (1 vs. 2) was evaluated.\nCorrelation between the change in NRS and\npatient body mass index (BMI) was calculated.\nResults: Pre-RFA average NRS scores were\navailable for 47 knees from 31 individuals, which\nwere included in the analysis. The mean NRS\nscore decreased by 50% at 2 weeks (n = 33; P\n< 0.001), 55% at 4-6 weeks (n = 18; P < 0.001),\nand 26% at 7-33 weeks (n = 18; P = 0.009).\nEight patients (12 knees) provided specific data\non the total duration of relief following RFA. The\nmean duration was 39 weeks or approximately\n9 months. There were no statistically significant\ndifferences between groups receiving 1 versus 2\ndiagnostic blocks at 2 weeks or 4-6 weeks post-\nRFA. At 7-33 weeks, those who received 1 block\nhad a decrease in NRS of –3.1, whereas those\nwho received 2 blocks had an increase in NRS\nof +0.1 (P = 0.008). There was no correlation\nidentified between BMI and change in NRS at\nany time point.\nLimitations: This study’s retrospective design\ninherently leads to a higher risk of selection bias.\nThe sample size was relatively small as a high\npercentage of patients were lost to follow-up. The\nprimary outcome measure for this study was the\nchange in mean NRS pain score, and the mean\nof ordinal data with a nonnormal distribution lacks\nvalidity in statistical analysis.\nConclusions: In this study population, C-RFA of\nthe genicular nerves lead to 50% or greater pain\nrelief at 2 weeks and 4-6 weeks postintervention.\nA 26% pain relief was achieved at 7-33 weeks,\nbut this did not meet the established minimal clinically\nimportant difference cutoff. Two diagnostic\ngenicular nerve blocks did not improve the rate\nof treatment success when compared to a single\ndiagnostic block. BMI does not appear to correlate\nwith outcomes.\nKey words: Genicular radiofrequency ablation,\ngenicular RFA, cooled radiofrequency ablation,\nchronic knee pain, knee osteoarthritis","PeriodicalId":110696,"journal":{"name":"Pain Management Case Reports","volume":"118 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain Management Case Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36076/pmcr.2019/3/83","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: Outside of an invasive total knee arthroplasty, the available therapies for the treatment of pain secondary to knee osteoarthritis (OA) provide marginal and short-lived symptomatic relief. Genicular nerve radiofrequency ablation (RFA) serves as an alternative treatment modality for OA-associated knee pain and disability. Objectives: To quantify the effectiveness of cooled radiofrequency ablation (C-RFA) of the genicular nerves for chronic knee pain secondary to OA. Study Design: Retrospective chart review performed using Redcap, implementing current procedural terminology codes. Setting: An academic pain management center. Methods: Study population included patients treated with C-RFA from April 2015 through June 2017. Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) data were analyzed at 3 time points: 2 weeks, 4-6 weeks, and 7-33 weeks post-RFA (extended follow-up). Primary outcome for statistical analysis was NRS and the change in NRS from baseline at each of the 3 predetermined time points. Differences between the change in NRS and the number of diagnostic blocks performed (1 vs. 2) was evaluated. Correlation between the change in NRS and patient body mass index (BMI) was calculated. Results: Pre-RFA average NRS scores were available for 47 knees from 31 individuals, which were included in the analysis. The mean NRS score decreased by 50% at 2 weeks (n = 33; P < 0.001), 55% at 4-6 weeks (n = 18; P < 0.001), and 26% at 7-33 weeks (n = 18; P = 0.009). Eight patients (12 knees) provided specific data on the total duration of relief following RFA. The mean duration was 39 weeks or approximately 9 months. There were no statistically significant differences between groups receiving 1 versus 2 diagnostic blocks at 2 weeks or 4-6 weeks post- RFA. At 7-33 weeks, those who received 1 block had a decrease in NRS of –3.1, whereas those who received 2 blocks had an increase in NRS of +0.1 (P = 0.008). There was no correlation identified between BMI and change in NRS at any time point. Limitations: This study’s retrospective design inherently leads to a higher risk of selection bias. The sample size was relatively small as a high percentage of patients were lost to follow-up. The primary outcome measure for this study was the change in mean NRS pain score, and the mean of ordinal data with a nonnormal distribution lacks validity in statistical analysis. Conclusions: In this study population, C-RFA of the genicular nerves lead to 50% or greater pain relief at 2 weeks and 4-6 weeks postintervention. A 26% pain relief was achieved at 7-33 weeks, but this did not meet the established minimal clinically important difference cutoff. Two diagnostic genicular nerve blocks did not improve the rate of treatment success when compared to a single diagnostic block. BMI does not appear to correlate with outcomes. Key words: Genicular radiofrequency ablation, genicular RFA, cooled radiofrequency ablation, chronic knee pain, knee osteoarthritis
膝神经冷却射频消融术治疗慢性膝骨关节炎疼痛的疗效观察
背景:在侵入性全膝关节置换术之外,现有的治疗膝关节骨关节炎(OA)继发疼痛的方法提供了边缘和短暂的症状缓解。膝神经射频消融术(RFA)可作为oa相关膝关节疼痛和残疾的替代治疗方式。目的:量化膝神经冷却射频消融(C-RFA)治疗骨性关节炎继发慢性膝关节疼痛的有效性。研究设计:使用Redcap进行回顾性图表回顾,执行现行程序术语规范。环境:学术疼痛管理中心。方法:研究人群包括2015年4月至2017年6月期间接受C-RFA治疗的患者。数值评定量表(NRS)数据在3个时间点进行分析:rfa后2周、4-6周和7-33周(延长随访)。统计分析的主要终点是nrrs和三个预定时间点NRS与基线的变化。评估NRS的变化和执行的诊断块数(1 vs. 2)之间的差异。计算NRS变化与患者身体质量指数(BMI)的相关性。结果:31个人的47个膝关节的rfa前平均NRS评分被纳入分析。2周时NRSscore平均下降50% (n = 33;P< 0.001), 4-6周时为55% (n = 18;P < 0.001), 7-33周26% (n = 18;P = 0.009)。8名患者(12个膝关节)提供了RFA后总缓解时间的具体数据。平均持续时间为39周或约9个月。在rfa后2周或4-6周,接受1个诊断块和2个诊断块的组之间没有统计学差异。在7-33周时,接受1块治疗的患者的NRS下降了-3.1,而接受2块治疗的患者的NRS增加了+0.1 (P = 0.008)。BMI与NRS变化在任何时间点均无相关性。局限性:本研究的回顾性设计固有地导致较高的选择偏倚风险。样本量相对较小,因为有很高比例的患者没有随访。本研究的主要结局指标为NRS平均疼痛评分的变化,非正态分布的有序数据的平均值在统计分析中缺乏有效性。结论:在本研究人群中,膝神经的C-RFA在干预后2周和4-6周导致50%或更多的疼痛缓解。在7-33周时达到26%的疼痛缓解,但这并没有达到最小临床重要差异的临界值。与单次诊断性神经阻滞相比,两次诊断性膝神经阻滞并没有提高治疗成功率。BMI似乎与结果无关。关键词:膝关节射频消融术,膝关节射频消融术,冷却射频消融术,慢性膝关节疼痛,膝关节骨关节炎
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信