Continuous Neuroablative vs Pulsed Neuromodulative Radiofrequency for Advanced Knee OA Patients .
A Randomized Controlled Trial to Compare Analgesia and Functional Improvement After Continuous Neuroablative and Pulsed Neuromodulative Radiofrequency Treatment of the Genicular Nerves in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis up to One Year After the Intervention
Pain Med. 2021 Mar 18; 22(3):637-652.Two hundred and sixteen patients suffering from chronic pain due to advanced knee osteoarthritis (grade 3 and 4 according to the Kellgren-Lawrence Scale) were randomized to receive continuous neuroablative radiofrequency (CNARF; n=108) or pulsed neuromodulative radiofrequency (PNMRF; n=108). The primary outcome of interest is pain measured using the visual analogue scale (VAS) at 1, 6, and 12 months follow-up. Secondary outcomes of interest included Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) Index total score and its associated subscores (pain, function, and stiffness). Furthermore, other outcomes of interest included the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) mental and physical summary scores, patient's satisfaction using the Likert scale, consumption of medications using the Medication Quantification Scale version III (MQS III), incidence of adverse events (i.e. abnormal proprioception, numbness, paresthesia, neuralgia, and motor weakness), and effective analgesic duration evaluated using Kaplan-Meier survival plots. All secondary outcomes were evaluated at 1, 6, and 12 months follow-up. Results revealed that the primary outcome of interest, VAS pain scores, was statistically significantly lower at all timepoints in the CNARF group vs PNMRF group (p=0.014; p<0.001; p=0.016, respectively). In addition, WOMAC total, WOMAC pain and WOMAC physical function scores were statistically significantly in favour of the CNARF group at all timepoints compared to the PNMRF group (p<0.05 for all). SF-12 physical summary subscores were statistically significantly in favour of the CNARF group vs PNMRF group at 1 and 6 months follow-up (p>0.05 for both), but this did not last at 12 months follow-up (p=0.067). WOMAC stiffness and SF-12 mental summary scores were not statistically significantly different between the 2 groups at any of the timepoints (p>0.05). The incidence of adverse events were not statistically significantly different between the 2 groups; 15/93 patients in the CNARF group and 8/95 patients in the PNMRF group reported an adverse events (p=0.668).
Desbloquear el informe ACE completo
Tiene acceso a 4 más artículos GRATUITOS este mes.
Haga clic a continuación para desbloquear y ver este ACE Reports
Desbloquear ahora
Evaluaciones críticas de los últimos ensayos controlados aleatorizados de gran impacto y revisiones sistemáticas en ortopedia
Acceso al contenido del podcast OrthoEvidence, que incluye colaboraciones con el Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, entrevistas con cirujanos reconocidos internacionalmente y mesas redondas sobre noticias y temas ortopédicos
Suscripción a The Pulse, un boletín quincenal basado en la evidencia y diseñado para ayudarle a tomar mejores decisiones clínicas
Acceso exclusivo a artículos de contenido original, incluidas revisiones sistemáticas propias, y artículos sobre métodos de investigación sanitaria y temas ortopédicos de actualidad
O actualícese hoy mismo y obtenga acceso a todo el contenido de OrthoEvidencepor tan sólo 1,99 $ a la semana.
¿Ya tiene una cuenta? Conectarse
Suscríbase a "El Pulso"
Ortopedia basada en la evidencia directamente a su bandeja de entrada. SUSCRIBIRSE