Cooled and traditional thermal radiofrequency ablation of genicular nerves in patients with chronic knee pain: a comparative outcomes analysis

Effectiveness of the Cooled Radiofrequency Ablation of Genicular Nerves in Patients with Chronic Knee Pain Due to Osteoarthritis: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Controlled Study

Background: Increasing evidence supporting the clinical effectiveness of cooled radiofrequency ablation (RFA) therapy for genicular nerves in patients with chronic knee osteoarthritis (OA) exists. However, no study has been conducted to eliminate the potential influence of a placebo effect associated with this procedure. Therefore, we evaluated the efficacy of cooled RFA compared with a sham procedure in patients with painful knees due to OA. Methods: In this double-blind, randomized, controlled study, participants were randomly assigned to receive cooled RFA of the knee (cooled RFA group, n = 20) or a sham procedure (sham group, n = 20). The primary outcome was the proportion of successful responders at the three-month follow-up. The secondary outcomes were successful responders at one and six months; pain intensity of the knee; functional status; medication; and satisfaction at one, three, and six months after the procedures. Results: For the primary outcome, the successful responder rate was significantly higher in the cooled RFA group (76.5%) than in the sham group (33.3%) (p = 0.018). For the secondary outcome, more successful responders were observed in the cooled RFA group than in the sham group at one and six months after the procedure (p = 0.041 and 0.007, respectively). The decreased knee pain intensity was maintained throughout the six-month follow-up period in the cooled RFA group. No differences were observed in functional status, medication change, or satisfaction in both groups. Conclusions: The cooled RFA of genicular nerves offers significant pain relief and surpasses the effects attributable to a placebo.

Cooled radiofrequency ablation of genicular nerves for knee osteoarthritis

Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a prevalent and debilitating musculoskeletal condition that significantly affects the quality of life of millions of individuals worldwide. In recent years, cooled radiofrequency ablation (CRFA) has become a viable treatment option for knee OA. This review thoroughly evaluated the existing literature on CRFA therapy for knee OA. It delved into the mechanisms behind CRFA, evaluated its clinical efficacy, and investigated potential avenues for future research and application. The insights gained from this review are crucial for healthcare professionals, researchers, and policymakers, offering an updated perspective on CRFA's role as a viable therapeutic option for knee OA.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Post-Radiofrequency Synovial Knee Fistula: Case Report

Recently, denervation therapies have drawn attention as a promising treatment, and cooled radiofrequency has been proposed as the best option to capture most of the genicular nerves. We present a rare case of synovial knee fistula after radiofrequency and its management. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first case reported in the literature. The treatment included immobilization and chemoprophylaxis. One week later, the fistula was closed, and 14 months later, the procedure was repeated without complications. Genicular radiofrequency ablation is an emerging technique, and providers should be aware of the reported complications to counsel patients and manage potential risks appropriately.

Is Radiofrequency Ablation Superior to Intra-Articular Injections for the Treatment of Symptomatic Knee Osteoarthritis?-A Systematic Review

The radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is considered a valid, minimally invasive treatment modality for the management of symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (OA). The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of RFA with that of commonly used intra-articular injections for the persistent knee pain due to OA. Medline/Pubmed and Scopus databases were systematically searched up to April 2023 to identify studies comparing the effect of RFA and intra-articular injections (IAIs) on knee OA. Nine studies including 899 patients fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were included in the systematic review. The RFA procedure was related with improved knee pain relief compared to IAIs at 3-, 6- and 12-month follow-up (p < 0.001). Similarly, functional improvement was greater in RFA treatment than that observed after hyaluronic acid (HA), steroid or platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections (Visual Analogue Scale p < 0.001, Numeric Rating Scale p = 0.019, Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index p = 0.012). The overall procedural complication rate of RFA was 10.2% and was higher than steroid (p = 0.023) and PRP (p = 0.017) injections. However, no severe adverse events were reported. For patients with symptomatic knee OA, RFA seems to be more effective than IAIs in alleviating pain and improving joint function, despite the relatively higher incidence of non-serious adverse events. However, due to the limited number of studies and patients, this result should be interpreted with caution and not be generalized to the entire knee OA population.