Cooled Radiofrequency Ablation Provides Prolonged Pain Relief Compared to Traditional Radiofrequency Ablation: A Real-World, Large Retrospective Clinical Comparison from a Single Practice

Advanced Interventional Procedures for Knee Osteoarthritis: What Is the Current Evidence?

The prevalence of knee osteoarthritis (OA) is the highest among all joints and likely to increase over the coming decades. Advances in the repertoire of diagnostic capabilities of imaging and an expansion in the availability and range of image-guided interventions has led to development of more advanced interventional procedures targeting pain related to OA pain while improving the function of patients presenting with this debilitating condition. We review the spectrum of established advanced interventional procedures for knee OA, describe the techniques used to perform these procedures safely, and discuss the clinical evidence supporting each of them.

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.

Efficacy and Safety of Cryoablation Compared with Cooled Radiofrequency Ablation of Genicular Nerves in Advanced Osteoarthritis of the Knee: A Study Protocol of Single-Centric, Assessor-Blinded, Randomized, Parallel-Group, Non-inferiority Study

PURPOSE

In patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis knee (OAK), cryoneurolysis (CRYO) and cooled radiofrequency ablation (C-RFA) are reported to be effective and safe; however, they have not been compared directly. The objective of this study is to compare CRYO and C-RFA of the genicular nerve (GN) in terms of efficacy and safety profile in patients with Kellgren and Lawrence (KL) grade ≥ 3 OAK.

METHODS

This single-centric, assessor-blinded, randomized, parallel-group, non-inferiority study will include 80 patients with KL grade ≥ 3 OAK. The patients with ≥ 50% pain relief on diagnostic block of three GNs will be randomized to one of the two groups, i.e., CRYO (n = 40) or C-RFA (n = 40). The three target GNs for the interventions will include: superior medial, superior lateral, and inferior medial. The primary outcome will be efficacy of CRYO or C-RFA at 2, 12, and 24 weeks post-procedure based on the 11-point Numerical Pain Rating Scale. The secondary outcomes will be functional improvement based on 12-item Oxford Knee Score and safety of both the procedures. The study is registered in the Clinical Trials Registry-India.

CONCLUSION

CRYO and C-RFA provide pain relief and improve functional outcome by preventing transmission of pain signals, though by distinct mechanisms. While C-RFA is an established treatment modality, recent evidence supports CRYO in patients with OAK. This study intends to demonstrate non-inferiority of CRYO against C-RFA, thereby supporting the use of CRYO as an additional treatment modality in patients with KL grade ≥ 3 OAK.

Ultrasound-guided thermal radiofrequency ablation of the genicular nerves after total knee replacement

The rate of refractory chronic pain after total knee replacement (TKR) is 20-25%, with no identifiable etiology in 6% of cases. Without an etiologic diagnosis, the surgeon is unlikely to consider revision, but pain poses a therapeutic challenge for achieving satisfaction and an acceptable quality of life. Genicular nerve radiofrequency ablation (GNRFA) was recently developed as a non-drug analgesic option. It is minimally invasive and safe, with few adverse effects, opening a new perspective for management of refractory chronic pain after TKR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Cooled radiofrequency ablation versus standard medical management for chronic sacroiliac joint pain: a multicenter, randomized comparative effectiveness study

INTRODUCTION

Low back pain is the leading cause of disability worldwide, with sacroiliac joint pain comprising up to 30% of cases of axial lower back pain. Conservative therapies provide only modest relief. Although placebo-controlled trials show efficacy for sacral lateral branch cooled radiofrequency ablation, there are no comparative effectiveness studies.

METHODS

In this randomized, multicenter comparative effectiveness study, 210 patients with clinically suspected sacroiliac joint pain who obtained short-term benefit from diagnostic sacroiliac joint injections and prognostic lateral branch blocks were randomly assigned to receive cooled radiofrequency ablation of the L5 dorsal ramus and S1-S3 lateral branches or standard medical management consisting of pharmacotherapy, injections and integrative therapies. The primary outcome measure was mean reduction in low back pain score on a 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale at 3 months. Secondary outcomes included measures of quality of life and function.

RESULTS

3 months post-treatment, the mean Numeric Rating Scale pain score for the cooled radiofrequency ablation group was 3.8±2.4 (mean reduction 2.5±2.5) compared with 5.9±1.7 (mean reduction 0.4±1.7) in the standard medical management group (p<0.0001). 52.3% of subjects in the cooled radiofrequency ablation group experienced >2 points or 30% pain relief and were deemed responders versus 4.3% of standard medical management patients (p<0.0001). Comparable improvements favoring cooled radiofrequency ablation were noted in Oswestry Disability Index score (mean 29.7±15.2 vs 41.5+13.6; p<0.0001) and quality of life (mean EuroQoL-5 score 0.68±0.22 vs 0.47±0.29; p<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with sacroiliac joint pain, cooled radiofrequency ablation provided statistically superior improvements across the spectrum of patient outcomes compared with standard medical management.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03601949.

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.

Comparison of conventional and cooled radiofrequency treatment of the genicular nerves versus sham procedure for patients with chronic knee pain: protocol for a multicentre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial (COGENIUS)

INTRODUCTION

The prevalence of chronic knee pain is increasing. Osteoarthritis (OA) and persistent postsurgical pain (PPSP) are two important causes of knee pain. Chronic knee pain is primarily treated with medications, physiotherapy, life-style changes and intra-articular infiltrations. A radiofrequency treatment (RF) of the genicular nerves is a therapeutical option for refractory knee pain. This study investigates the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of conventional and cooled RF in patients suffering from chronic, therapy resistant, moderate to severe knee pain due to OA and PPSP.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The COGENIUS trial is a double-blinded, randomised controlled trial with 2-year follow-up. Patients and outcome assessors are blinded. Patients will be recruited and treated in Belgium and the Netherlands. All PPSP after a total knee prothesis and OA patients (grades 2-4) will undergo a run-in period of 1-3 months where conservative treatment will be optimised. After the run-in period, 200 patient per group will be randomised to conventional RF, cooled RF or a sham procedure following a 2:2:1 ratio. The analysis will include a comparison of the effectiveness of each RF treatment with the sham procedure and secondarily between conventional and cooled RF. All comparisons will be made for each indication separately. The primary outcome is the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index score at 6 months. Other outcomes include knee pain, physical functionality, health-related quality of life, emotional health, medication use, healthcare and societal cost and adverse events up to 24 months postintervention.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the University of Antwerp (Number Project ID 3069-Edge 002190-BUN B3002022000025), the Ethics committee of Maastricht University (Number NL80503.068.22-METC22-023) and the Ethics committee of all participating hospitals. Results of the study will be published in international peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05407610.

Comparison of cooled versus conventional radiofrequency treatment of the genicular nerves for chronic knee pain: a multicenter non-inferiority randomized pilot trial (COCOGEN trial)

BACKGROUND

Radiofrequency (RF) treatment of the genicular nerves has the potential to reduce chronic knee pain due to osteoarthritis or persistent postsurgical pain, however, a direct comparison between the two main modalities used, conventional and cooled, is lacking.

METHODS

This double blind, non-inferiority, pilot, randomized controlled trial compared the effects of cooled and conventional RF in chronic knee pain patients suffering from osteoarthritis or persistent postsurgical pain after total knee arthroplasty. Patients were randomized following a 1:1 rate. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with ≥50% pain reduction at 3 months postintervention. Other outcomes were knee pain, functionality, quality of life, emotional health, and adverse events up to 6 months postintervention. Conventional RF treatment was tested for non-inferiority to cooled in reducing knee pain at 3 months follow-up.

RESULTS

Forty-nine of 70 patients were included, of which 47 completed a 3-month follow-up. The primary outcome was achieved in 4 of 23 patients treated with conventional RF (17%) vs in 8 of 24 with cooled (33%) (p=0,21). Results from the non-inferiority comparison were inconclusive in relation to the non-inferiority margin. There was no statistically significant difference between secondary outcomes. There were no serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Both conventional and cooled RF treatment reduced pain in the osteoarthritis and persistent postsurgical pain population. This pilot study did not demonstrate statistically significant differences in the proportion of patients experiencing ≥50% pain reduction between techniques. The non-inferiority analysis was inconclusive. These results warrant further research.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03865849.

The Booster Effect of a Single Quarterly Dose of Hyaluronic Acid in Knee Osteoarthritis: Five-Year Results of a Registry-Based Study

Objective

Viscosupplementation by hyaluronic acid (HA) is well established non-surgical treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA). This registry-based study investigated the booster effect of a quarterly intra-articular single knee injection (30mg/2ml) for five years.

Methods

Sixty patients, including 29 males and 31 females, with a mean ± SD age 61.07 ± 9.15 with Kellgren-Lawrence grade I-III KOA, have been selected from a registry of interventional treatments for musculoskeletal pain conditions. To be eligible, patients had to be treated with a single quarterly intraarticular injection of HA with a follow-up of at least five years and assessed with Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at baseline and after each HA injection in the first 24 months and at 36, 48, and 60 months.

Results

Sixty of 63 patients enrolled in this study completed the 60 months of follow-up. Patients had a marked improvement in knee function and pain, expressed by the significant reduction in WOMAC (T0 48.62±8.95 vs. T11 10.75±4.36; p<0.0001) and NRS scores (6.38±1.06 vs. T11 0.95±0.89 p<0.0001) from the baseline to the end of the follow-up period.

Conclusion

A quarterly injection of HA provides a rapid, safe, and stable long-term reduction of pain and improvement of function in elderly people with mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis along a five-year period of treatment and follow-up. Further investigations are necessary to confirm these findings.