腰椎射频消融(LRFA)-神话和事实:文献的叙述性回顾。

IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Vinicius Tieppo Francio, Logan Leavitt, Christopher Radlicz, Benjamin Gill, Dawood Sayed
{"title":"腰椎射频消融(LRFA)-神话和事实:文献的叙述性回顾。","authors":"Vinicius Tieppo Francio, Logan Leavitt, Christopher Radlicz, Benjamin Gill, Dawood Sayed","doi":"10.1007/s11916-025-01413-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Lumbar radiofrequency ablation (LRFA) is an interventional procedure that utilizes thermal energy to selectively ablate the lumbar medial branch nerves (LMBN) to provide relief from facet-mediated chronic axial low back pain. While LRFA is widely performed, considerable variability exists in its technical execution. This review aims to synthesize the current literature on key device- and procedure-related factors that influence radiofrequency lesioning and to clarify common misconceptions regarding LRFA.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Emerging evidence suggests that several device-related parameters-including cannula and needle size, active tip length, temperature settings, lesioning duration, and needle angulation-affect lesion size and clinical outcomes. However, the impact of adjunctive steroid administration on lesion characteristics and therapeutic efficacy remains inconclusive. Furthermore, while some concerns have been raised regarding the potential for LRFA to accelerate spinal degeneration, definitive evidence is lacking. There is, however, a plausible association between LRFA and multifidus atrophy. The use of motor testing prior to ablation is warranted. Current data support the safety of LRFA in patients with posterior spinal instrumentation and implantable devices. Device- and procedure-specific variables may significantly influence LRFA lesion characteristics and clinical outcomes. While the safety profile of LRFA is generally favorable, potential complications exist, underscoring the need for a nuanced understanding of optimal procedural techniques. Despite its widespread adoption, misconceptions persist regarding optimal approaches, safety considerations, and determinants of efficacy. This review critically evaluates the existing literature to address these controversies and provide an evidence-based perspective on LRFA.</p>","PeriodicalId":50602,"journal":{"name":"Current Pain and Headache Reports","volume":"29 1","pages":"98"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lumbar Radiofrequency Ablation (LRFA)- Myths and Facts: A Narrative Review of the Literature.\",\"authors\":\"Vinicius Tieppo Francio, Logan Leavitt, Christopher Radlicz, Benjamin Gill, Dawood Sayed\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11916-025-01413-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Lumbar radiofrequency ablation (LRFA) is an interventional procedure that utilizes thermal energy to selectively ablate the lumbar medial branch nerves (LMBN) to provide relief from facet-mediated chronic axial low back pain. While LRFA is widely performed, considerable variability exists in its technical execution. This review aims to synthesize the current literature on key device- and procedure-related factors that influence radiofrequency lesioning and to clarify common misconceptions regarding LRFA.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Emerging evidence suggests that several device-related parameters-including cannula and needle size, active tip length, temperature settings, lesioning duration, and needle angulation-affect lesion size and clinical outcomes. However, the impact of adjunctive steroid administration on lesion characteristics and therapeutic efficacy remains inconclusive. Furthermore, while some concerns have been raised regarding the potential for LRFA to accelerate spinal degeneration, definitive evidence is lacking. There is, however, a plausible association between LRFA and multifidus atrophy. The use of motor testing prior to ablation is warranted. Current data support the safety of LRFA in patients with posterior spinal instrumentation and implantable devices. Device- and procedure-specific variables may significantly influence LRFA lesion characteristics and clinical outcomes. While the safety profile of LRFA is generally favorable, potential complications exist, underscoring the need for a nuanced understanding of optimal procedural techniques. Despite its widespread adoption, misconceptions persist regarding optimal approaches, safety considerations, and determinants of efficacy. This review critically evaluates the existing literature to address these controversies and provide an evidence-based perspective on LRFA.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50602,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Pain and Headache Reports\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"98\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Pain and Headache Reports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11916-025-01413-z\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Pain and Headache Reports","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11916-025-01413-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

回顾目的:腰椎射频消融(LRFA)是一种利用热能选择性消融腰椎内侧支神经(LMBN)的介入性手术,以缓解关节面介导的慢性轴性腰痛。虽然LRFA被广泛执行,但其技术执行存在相当大的可变性。本综述旨在综合当前文献中影响射频损伤的关键设备和程序相关因素,并澄清关于LRFA的常见误解。最新发现:新出现的证据表明,一些与器械相关的参数——包括套管和针头的大小、有效尖端的长度、温度设置、病变持续时间和针头角度——会影响病变的大小和临床结果。然而,辅助类固醇给药对病变特征和治疗效果的影响尚无定论。此外,虽然有些人担心LRFA可能会加速脊柱退变,但缺乏明确的证据。然而,LRFA与多裂肌萎缩之间似乎存在关联。在消融前进行电机测试是有必要的。目前的数据支持LRFA在后路脊柱内固定和植入式器械患者中的安全性。器械和手术特定变量可能显著影响LRFA病变特征和临床结果。虽然LRFA的安全性总体上是有利的,但存在潜在的并发症,强调需要对最佳手术技术进行细致入微的了解。尽管它被广泛采用,但关于最佳方法、安全性考虑和疗效决定因素的误解仍然存在。这篇综述批判性地评估了现有的文献,以解决这些争议,并为LRFA提供了一个基于证据的视角。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Lumbar Radiofrequency Ablation (LRFA)- Myths and Facts: A Narrative Review of the Literature.

Purpose of review: Lumbar radiofrequency ablation (LRFA) is an interventional procedure that utilizes thermal energy to selectively ablate the lumbar medial branch nerves (LMBN) to provide relief from facet-mediated chronic axial low back pain. While LRFA is widely performed, considerable variability exists in its technical execution. This review aims to synthesize the current literature on key device- and procedure-related factors that influence radiofrequency lesioning and to clarify common misconceptions regarding LRFA.

Recent findings: Emerging evidence suggests that several device-related parameters-including cannula and needle size, active tip length, temperature settings, lesioning duration, and needle angulation-affect lesion size and clinical outcomes. However, the impact of adjunctive steroid administration on lesion characteristics and therapeutic efficacy remains inconclusive. Furthermore, while some concerns have been raised regarding the potential for LRFA to accelerate spinal degeneration, definitive evidence is lacking. There is, however, a plausible association between LRFA and multifidus atrophy. The use of motor testing prior to ablation is warranted. Current data support the safety of LRFA in patients with posterior spinal instrumentation and implantable devices. Device- and procedure-specific variables may significantly influence LRFA lesion characteristics and clinical outcomes. While the safety profile of LRFA is generally favorable, potential complications exist, underscoring the need for a nuanced understanding of optimal procedural techniques. Despite its widespread adoption, misconceptions persist regarding optimal approaches, safety considerations, and determinants of efficacy. This review critically evaluates the existing literature to address these controversies and provide an evidence-based perspective on LRFA.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Current Pain and Headache Reports
Current Pain and Headache Reports CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
2.70%
发文量
91
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: This journal aims to review the most important, recently published clinical findings regarding the diagnosis, treatment, and management of pain and headache. By providing clear, insightful, balanced contributions by international experts, the journal intends to serve all those involved in the care and prevention of pain and headache. We accomplish this aim by appointing international authorities to serve as Section Editors in key subject areas, such as anesthetic techniques in pain management, cluster headache, neuropathic pain, and migraine. Section Editors, in turn, select topics for which leading experts contribute comprehensive review articles that emphasize new developments and recently published papers of major importance, highlighted by annotated reference lists. An international Editorial Board reviews the annual table of contents, suggests articles of special interest to their country/region, and ensures that topics are current and include emerging research. Commentaries from well-known figures in the field are also provided.
×
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