Efficacy and safety of radiofrequency ablation for treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Minimally invasive interventional procedures for osteoarthritis and inflammatory arthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

to summarize the evidence on the efficacy of minimally invasive interventional procedures such as radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) in patients with osteoarthritis or inflammatory arthritis.

METHODS

a literature search was conducted in PubMed and Web of Science databases. Both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSI) were included. The results were organized according to the treated anatomical site: knee, hip, foot and ankle, shoulder, hand and wrist, sacroiliac joints. Data about treatment efficacy were extracted. The main outcome was change in pain intensity using the 0-10 visual analog scale (VAS) from baseline to 1 month. Additional timepoints at 3, 6 and 12 months were assessed. Change in functional status was evaluated. Pooled estimates were calculated as the mean difference (MD) and 95 % confidence interval relative to baseline. The meta-analyses of RCTs and NRSI were conducted separately.

RESULTS

of the 4599 retrieved articles, 164 were included in the review and, considering all the established timepoints, 111 (38 RCTs and 73 NRSI) were selected for the meta-analysis. Only one article described patients with inflammatory arthritis. In the meta-analysis of RCTs, one month after the procedure, MD in VAS was -3.98 (-4.41 to -3.55; k = 21) for knee RFA, and -3.18 (-3.96 to -2.39; k = 8) for sacroiliac joints RFA. In the meta-analysis of NRSI, MD in VAS was -4.12 (-4.63 to -3.61; k = 23) for knee RFA, -3.84 (-4.77 to -2.92; k = 7) for knee TAE, -4.34 (-4.96 to -3.71; k = 2) for hip RFA, -3.83 (-4.52 to -3.15; k = 3) for shoulder RFA and -4.93 (-5.58 to -4.28; k = 14) for sacroiliac joints RFA. Significant decrease in pain intensity was found also at 3, 6 and 12 months. Additionally, functional status improved at all the assessed timepoints.

CONCLUSION

minimally invasive interventional procedures can improve pain and functional status of patients affected by OA or chronic sacroiliac pain of degenerative origin. Further research is warranted in the field of inflammatory rheumatic diseases.

Surgical Interventions for the Management of Obesity-Related Joint Pain: A Narrative Review

Obesity-related joint pain is a common and debilitating condition that significantly impacts the quality of life, primarily due to the excess weight straining the joints. This results in inflammation and degeneration, which can cause pain, stiffness, and difficulty moving. We aimed to comprehensively review the literature discussing surgical interventions for obesity-related joint pain. We searched across databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library) to identify studies published between 2000 and 2023 that assessed surgical interventions for obesity-related joint pain. This review highlights the complex interplay of mechanical, inflammatory, and metabolic factors contributing to joint pain in obese individuals, highlighting both surgical and non-surgical interventions. Non-surgical interventions include weight loss, exercise, physical therapy, and medications. Surgical interventions include bariatric surgery and joint replacement surgery. Bariatric surgery significantly reduces body weight and improves the quality of life outcomes; however, multiple studies have found no improvement or worsening of joint pain post-surgery. Total joint arthroplasty has demonstrated good improvement in pain and function outcomes based on recent meta-analyses, although risks of complications are higher in obese patients. The treatment choice for obesity-related joint pain depends on the individual patient's circumstances. Non-surgical interventions are usually the first line of treatment. However, if these interventions are not effective, surgical interventions may be an option.

Complications and opioid-prescribing patterns following genicular nerve radiofrequency ablation versus intra-articular injection: a matched cohort study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Genicular nerve radiofrequency ablation (GNRFA) is an emerging procedure used to relieve pain from severe knee osteoarthritis. While there have been rare reports of significant complications, their incidence has not been well established. The objective of this study was to examine complication rates at 30 and 90 days post treatment as well as characterize opioid-prescribing patterns before and after treatment.

METHODS

A large national database was queried to identify patients undergoing GNRFA from 2015 to 2022 and matched to control cohorts composed of patients receiving either intra-articular corticosteroid (CSI) or hyaluronic acid injection (HAI) of the knee. Complication rates at 30 and 90 days were analyzed. Opioid utilization was assessed in the 6 months before and after treatment.

RESULTS

Rates of infection (0.1%, CI 0.02% to 0.5% vs 0.2%, CI 0.05% to 0.6%), septic arthritis (<0.1%, CI 0.003% to 0.4% vs 0.1%, CI 0.02% to 0.5%), deep vein thrombosis (2.0%, CI 1.3% to 2.7% vs 1.6%, CI 1.0% to 2.2%), pulmonary embolism (1.2%, CI 0.6% to 1.7% vs 1.3%, CI 1.1% to 2.5%), bleeding (<0.1%, CI 0.003% to 0.4% vs 0%, CI 0% to 0.3%), seroma (<0.1%, CI 0.003% to 0.4% vs 0.2%, CI 0.05% to 0.6%), nerve injury (0%, CI 0% to 0.3% vs 0%, CI 0% to 0.3%) and thermal injury (0%, CI 0% to 0.3% vs 0%, CI 0% to 0.3%) were not different between CSI and GNRFA cohorts at 30 days. Rate of swelling was significantly greater in the GNRFA cohort (9.4%, CI 7.6% to 10.4% vs 6.4%, CI 4.8% to 7.2%, p=0.003) at 30 days. At 90 days, rates of septic arthritis (0.1%, CI 0.02% to 0.5% vs 0.3%, CI 0.08% to 0.7%), deep vein thrombosis (3.1%, CI 2.1% to 3.8% vs 3.1%, CI 2.2% to 3.9%), pulmonary embolism (1.5%, CI 0.9% to 2.1% vs 1.8%, CI 1.2% to 2.5%), and nerve injury (0%, CI 0% to 0.3% vs <0.1%, CI 0.003% to 0.4%) were not significantly different.Between HAI versus GNRFA cohorts, no significant differences were seen in rates of infection (0.3%, CI 0.08% to 0.07% vs 0.7%, CI 0.3% to 1.2%), septic arthritis (0.2%, CI 0.05% to 0.6% vs 0.4%, CI 0.2% to 0.9%), deep vein thrombosis (2.0%, CI 1.3% to 2.7% vs 1.9%, CI 1.2% to 2.7%), pulmonary embolism (1.5%, CI 0.9% to 2.2% vs 1.7%, CI 1.1% to 2.5%), bleeding (0.1%, CI 0.02% to 0.5% vs 0.2%, CI 0.05% to 0.6%), seroma (<0.1%, CI 0.03% to 0.4% vs 0%, CI 0% to 0.3%), nerve injury (0%, CI 0% to 0.3% vs 0%, CI 0% to 0.3%), swelling (14.0%, CI 11.6% to 15.1% vs 12.0%, CI 10.3% to 13.6%), and thermal injury (<0.1%, CI 0.03% to 0.4% vs <0.01%, CI 0.3% to 0.4%) at 30 days. Rates of infection (0.7%, CI 0.3% to 1.2% vs 1.4%, CI 0.9% to 2.1%), septic arthritis (0.3%, CI 0.1% to 0.8% vs 0.5%, CI 0.2% to 1.1%), deep vein thrombosis (3.6%, CI 2.6% to 4.4% vs 3.1%, CI 2.2% to 4.0%), pulmonary embolism (2.3%, CI 1.5% to 3.0% vs 2.1%, CI 1.4% to 3.0%) and nerve injury (0%, CI 0% to 0.3% vs 0.1%, CI 0.02% to 0.5%) were not significantly different at 90 days.There were no significant differences in level of pretreatment opioid utilization although overall consumption in mean daily morphine equivalents was greater in the GNRFA cohort. Opioid utilization significantly increased in the first 30 days after ablation in patients with no prior opioid use compared to controls. In patients with some and chronic prior opioid use, opioid requirements were generally decreased in all treatment groups at 6 months with no clearly superior treatment in reducing opioid consumption.

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrated that GNRFA possesses a safety profile similar to that of intra-articular injections although significant adverse events such as venous thromboembolism and septic arthritis may occur rarely. Although opioid utilization generally increased in the 30 days after ablation compared with intra-articular injection, similar reduction in opioid consumption at 6 months was seen in patients with prior opioid use in the ablation and control cohorts.

Review of genicular artery embolization, radiofrequency ablation, and cryoneurolysis in the management of osteoarthritis-related knee pain

Osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee represents one of the most common diseases in the world, affecting an estimated 14 million people in the United States alone. Exercise therapy and oral pain medication are first-line treatments but have limited efficacy. Next-line treatments such as intra-articular injections are limited in durability. Moreover, total knee replacements, although effective, require surgical intervention, which has considerable variability in patient satisfaction. Novel minimally invasive image-guided interventions are becoming more widespread for treating OA-related knee pain. Recent studies of these interventions have revealed promising results, minor complications, and reasonable patient satisfaction. In this study, published manuscripts were reviewed in the field of minimally invasive, image-guided interventions for OA-related knee pain, with a focus on genicular artery embolization, radiofrequency ablation, and cryoneurolysis. Recent studies have demonstrated a significant decrease in pain-related symptoms following these interventions. Reported complications were mild in the reviewed studies. Image-guided interventions for OA-related knee pain exist as valuable options for patients who fail other therapies, may not be good surgical candidates, or wish to avoid surgical intervention. Further studies with randomization and an increased length of follow-up are needed to better characterize outcomes following these minimally invasive therapies.

Osteoarthritis year in review 2022: epidemiology & therapy

This 'Year in Review' provides a synopsis of key research themes and individual studies from the clinical osteoarthritis (OA) field, focused on epidemiology and therapy. The electronic database search for the review was adapted from the 2021 year in review search, to increase search specificity for relevant study designs, and was conducted in Medline, Embase and medRxiv (31^st March 2021 to 4^th March 2022). Following screening for eligibility, studies were grouped according to their key research design, including reviews, cohorts and randomised trials. 11 key themes emerged, including the importance of several comorbidities in predicting OA incidence and prevalence, surgical approaches that can reduce the risk of post-traumatic OA, the heterogenous but nevertheless relatively stable nature of OA subgroup trajectories, the paucity of robust studies particularly of surgery for OA and the very modest benefit of many therapies under evaluation in trials. A particular interest of the authors was to consider whether new studies are helping determine how to better ensure the right patient with OA is matched to the right treatment at the right time. There are several new studies developing improved predictive models through big data analytics and machine learning which show promise, need validation, and may support new approaches to stratified care.

Treatment Options for Patellofemoral Arthritis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To present a synthesis of recent literature regarding the treatment of patellofemoral arthritis RECENT FINDINGS: Risk factors of PFJ OA include patella malalignment or maltracking, injury to supportive structures including the MPFL, dysfunction of hamstring and quadriceps coordination, lower limb alignment, trochlear dysplasia, patellar trauma, or ACL surgery. Special physical exam maneuvers include patellar grind test, apprehension test, and lateral patellar tilt angle. Radiographs that should be obtained first-line include weight bearing bilateral AP, lateral, and Merchant views. CT and MRI are used to assess trochlear dysplasia, excessive patellar height, and TT-TG distance. Non-operative management options discussed include non-pharmacologic treatment (patient education, self-management, physical therapy, weight loss), ESWT, cold therapy, taping, bracing, and orthotics. Pharmacologic management options discussed include NSAIDs, acetaminophen, oral narcotics, and duloxetine. Injection therapies include glucocorticoids, hyaluronic acid, PRP, and other regenerative therapies (BMAC, adipose, or mesenchymal stem cells). Other treatment options include radiofrequency ablation and botulinum toxin. The algorithm for the surgical treatment of PFJ OA can begin with arthroscopic assessment of the PF articular cartilage to address mechanical symptoms and to evaluate/treat lateral soft tissue with or without overhanging lateral osteophytes. If patients fail to have symptomatic improvement, a TTO can be considered in those patients less than 50 years of age or active patients >50 years old. In patients with severe PFJ OA, refractory to the above treatments, PFA should be considered. While early PFA design and technique were less than encouraging, more recent implant design and surgical technique have demonstrated robust results in the literature. Patellofemoral osteoarthritis is a challenging orthopedic problem to treat, in that it can often affect younger patients, with otherwise well-functioning knees. It is a unique entity compared to TF OA with distinct epidemiology, biomechanics and risk factors and treatment options.

Efficacy and safety of radiofrequency treatment for improving knee pain and function in knee osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

The clinical utility of radiofrequency (RF) in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) remains unclear. We conducted a meta-analysis to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of RF treatment in patients with knee OA.

Methods

Searches of the PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang Data databases were performed through August 30, 2021. The major outcomes from published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients with knee OA were compared between RF and control groups, including Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) or Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) scores, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Global Perceived Effect (GPE) scale, and adverse effects at available follow-up times.

Results

Fifteen RCTs involving 1009 patients were included in this meta-analysis, and the results demonstrated that RF treatment correlated with improvements in pain relief (VAS/NRS score, all P < 0.001) and knee function (WOMAC, all P < 0.001) at 1–2, 4, 12, and 24 weeks after treatment as well as patients’ degree of satisfaction with treatment effectiveness (GPE scale, 12 weeks, P < 0.001). OKSs did not differ significantly between the two groups. Moreover, treatment with RF did not significantly increase adverse effects. Subgroup analysis of knee pain indicated that the efficacy of RF treatment targeting the genicular nerve was significantly better than intra-articular RF at 12 weeks after treatment (P = 0.03).

Conclusions

This meta-analysis showed that RF is an efficacious and safe treatment for relieving knee pain and improving knee function in patients with knee OA.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13018-021-02906-4.