Superior Clinical Improvement with Cooled Radiofrequency Ablation vs HA Injection for Knee OA Pain
This report has been verified
by one or more authors of the
original publication.
This study has been identified as potentially high impact.
OE's AI-driven High Impact metric estimates the influence a paper is likely to have by integrating signals from both the journal in which it is published and the scientific content of the article itself.
Developed using state-of-the-art natural language processing, the OE High Impact model more accurately predicts a study's future citation performance than journal impact factor alone.
This enables earlier recognition of clinically meaningful research and helps readers focus on articles most likely to shape future practice.
Cooled Radiofrequency Ablation Compared with a Single Injection of Hyaluronic Acid for Chronic Knee Pain: A Multicenter, Randomized Clinical Trial Demonstrating Greater Efficacy and Equivalent Safety for Cooled Radiofrequency Ablation.
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2020 Sep 2;102(17):1501-1510.Exclusive Author Interview
One hundred and seventy-seven patients with chronic knee pain from knee osteoarthritis (OA) were randomized to receive cooled radiofrequency ablation (CRFA; n=89) of the genicular nerves or a single intra-articular hyaluronic acid (HA; n=88). The primary outcome of interest was the number of patients who reported a =>50% reduction in pain scores from baseline after 6 months. Additional outcomes of interest included pain scores on a Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Index, WOMAC pain scores, WOMAC physical function scores, WOMAC stiffness scores, patient perception of treatment effect as reflected by the Global Perceived Effect (GPE) score, the Euro-Qol-5 Dimensions-5 Level (EQ-5D-5L) quality of life questionnaire, and the incidence of treatment-related and non-treatment related adverse events. Outcomes were assessed at 1, 3, and 6 months post-treatment. Results revealed a statistically significantly higher proportion of patients in the CRFA group who reported =>50% improvement in pain scores from baseline compared to the HA group (71% vs. 38%, p<0.0001). NRS pain scores, WOMAC total scores, WOMAC pain scores WOMAC physical function scores, GPE scores, and EQ-5D-5L scores were statistically significantly in favour of the CRFA group at all time points compared to the HA group (p<0.05 for all). WOMAC stiffness scores were statistically significantly in favour of the CRFA group at 3 months (p=0.0022) and 6 months (p<0.0001) post-treatment. The incidence of both treatment-related (18 vs 9) and non-treatment related (76 vs 54) adverse events were higher in the CRFA group, with the majority of adverse events being musculoskeletal in nature.
Unlock the Full ACE Report
You have access to 4 more FREE articles this month.
Click below to unlock and view this ACE Reports
Unlock Now
Critical appraisals of the latest, high-impact randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews in orthopaedics
Access to OrthoEvidence podcast content, including collaborations with the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, interviews with internationally recognized surgeons, and roundtable discussions on orthopaedic news and topics
Subscription to The Pulse, a twice-weekly evidence-based newsletter designed to help you make better clinical decisions
Exclusive access to original content articles, including in-house systematic reviews, and articles on health research methods and hot orthopaedic topics
