Jia Y, Cheng H, Shrestha N, Ren H, Zhao C, Feng K, Luo F. Effectiveness and safety of high-voltage pulsed radiofrequency to treat patients with primary trigeminal neuralgia: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, controlled study.
J Headache Pain 2023;
24:91. [PMID:
37464283 DOI:
10.1186/s10194-023-01629-7]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/16/2023] [Accepted: 07/10/2023] [Indexed: 07/20/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Trigeminal neuralgia (TN) is a debilitating pain disorder that still lacks an ideal treatment option. Pulsed radiofrequency (PRF), especially with high output voltage, is a novel and minimally invasive technique. PRF is regarded a promising treatment option for TN patients who respond poorly to medical treatment; however, the available evidence still lacks high quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Our study aimed to evaluate the long-term (1 year and 2 years) effects and safety of high-voltage PRF in primary TN patients and provide stronger evidence for TN treatment options.
METHODS
We performed a multicenter, double-blind, RCT in adults (aged 18-75 years) with primary TN who responded poorly to drug therapy or were unable to tolerate the side effects of drug. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either high voltage PRF or nerve block with steroid and local anesthetic drugs. The primary endpoint was the 1-year response rate. This trial has been registered in the clinicaltrials.gov website (registration number: NCT03131466).
RESULTS
One hundred and sixty-two patients were screened for enrollment between April 28th,2017 and September1st, 2019, among whom, 28 were excluded. One hundred and thirty-four participants were randomly assigned to either receive high voltage PRF (n = 67) or nerve block (n = 67). The proportion of patients with a positive response at 1-year after the procedure in the PRF group was significantly higher than that in the nerve block group in the intention-to-treat population (73.1% vs. 32.8%, p < 0.001). There was no difference between groups in the incidence of adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS
Our findings support that high voltage PRF could be a preferred interventional choice prior to receiving more invasive surgical treatment or neuro-destructive treatment for TN patients who have poor responses to medical treatment.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
Our study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (trial registration number: NCT03131466).
Collapse