Comparative Effectivenesses of Pulsed Radiofrequency and Transforaminal Steroid Injection for Radicular Pain due to Disc Herniation: a Prospective Randomized Trial

Epidural steroid injections in lumbar disc herniation- Evidence synthesis from 72 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and a total of 7701 patients

Introduction

The role of epidural steroid injection in treating sciatica still remains debatable.

Research question

To compare epidural steroid injection with other manipulations in terms of pain control, quality of life and other parameters (Q1), compare the various available ESI alternatives regarding the approach (Q2), compare ESI to analgesia (Q3), identify the ideal ESI protocol (Q4), compare different guiding techniques (Q5) and determine the role of ESI as e predictive factor for the outcome.

Material and methods

This systematic review searched three databases from inception to February 2024. Independent reviewers assessed and gathered the data and also the quality of evidence was critically appreciated.

Results

The systematic review included 72 randomized controlled trials 7701 patients. There was a big variation among the aim of the studies. ESI proved to surpass other conservative methods for treating sciatica, however it does not provide long-term results. US- guided as well asFL-guided ESI was proved to have superior results. On the other hand, the role of ESIs in predicting the requirement for surgery is understudied. Comparing the different approaches in ESI the TFESI proved mostly to have better results.Surgery still remains the method with the most instant results providing also long-term treatment.

Discussion and conclusions

ESI has superior results to other conservative treatment modalities for sciatica; However surgery seems to have more immediate effect and better long term outcome. Apart from different approaches, additional agents such as amitriptyline proved to have effect when administered additionally to ESI. More studies need to be conducted for ESI as a predictive factor for the outcome or need of surgery.

Effects of Pulsed Radiofrequency Duration in Patients With Chronic Lumbosacral Radicular Pain: A Randomized Double-Blind Study

OBJECTIVES

We hypothesized that the duration of pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) application may affect the effectiveness of PRF in patients with chronic lumbosacral radicular pain (LRP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this prospective, double-blind, randomized study, 68 patients were randomly allocated to two groups: a 6-minute group, in which PRF was applied at 42 °C for 2 minutes followed by a 2-minute pause, repeated three times; and a 12-minute group, with a continuous application at 42 °C for 12 minutes. The total application time in each group was equal. After PRF, 2 to 3 mL of 1% lidocaine with 5 mg of dexamethasone was injected. The primary outcome was the intensity of leg pain measured using a numerical rating scale (NRS) three months after the procedure. The secondary outcomes were intensities of leg and back pain, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), the Medication Quantification Scale III (MQS), the Global Perceived Effect of Satisfaction (GPES), and the incidence of adverse events during follow-up. Primary and secondary outcomes were analyzed using a linear mixed-effect model in the modified intention-to-treat population.

RESULTS

Each group comprised 34 patients. Three patients in each group did not receive the allocated intervention owing to alleviation of pain. The estimated NRS mean of leg pain at three months was 4.0 (95% CI, 3.2-4.9) and 4.5 (95% CI, 3.6-5.4) in the 6- and 12-minute groups, respectively, with no significant difference between groups (estimated mean difference, -0.5; 95% CI, -1.8 to 0.8; p = 0.436). Regarding the intensities of leg and back pain, ODI, MQS, and GPES, there was no significant difference between the two groups except for GPES at six months. No adverse events were observed in the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with chronic LRP, a prolonged PRF application of 12 minutes, compared with 6 minutes, caused no significant difference in leg pain intensity.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

The Clinicaltrials.gov registration number under the Clinical Trial Registry of Korea for the study is KCT0003850; https://cris.nih.go.kr.

Percutaneous plasma disc decompression through a lower surgical approach for the treatment of cervicogenic headache in patients with cervical spondylotic radiculopathy: A retrospective cohort study

Cervical spondylotic radiculopathy (CSR) is the most common type of cervical spondylosis, frequently accompanied by cervicogenic headache (CEH). Percutaneous plasma disc decompression (PPDD) and pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) are minimally invasive techniques targeting cervical intervertebral discs or cervical nerves, and have been proven to be effective methods for treatment of CSR and CEH. The present study aimed to evaluate clinical efficacy and practicality of percutaneous plasma disc decompression (PPDD) via a lower surgical approach for the treatment of cervicogenic headache (CEH) and upper extremity radicular pain by analyzing clinical outcomes of patients with cervical spondylotic radiculopathy (CSR) undergoing PPDD and pulsed radiofrequency (PRF). Clinical data of patients with CSR who received PPDD (n=79) or PRF (n=92) at Shanghai Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital (Shanghai, China) and Jiashan County People's Hospital (Jiaxing, China) from January 2022 to December 2022 were retrospectively collected and analyzed. The surgical site and procedure, bleeding volume, preoperative analgesic use and upper extremity symptoms, history of nerve block treatment and duration of disease were recorded, as well as relevant postoperative complications (infection, hematoma, nerve injury). The therapeutic effects [NRS (numeric rating scale) and NDI (neck disability index) score, and CEH remission rate at 1, 3 and 6 months after treatment] of both surgical methods were investigated using the telephone follow-up. CEH remission rates at 1, 3 and 6 months after surgery in the PPDD group were significantly higher than in the PRF group (78.8 vs. 43.5, P=0.016; 84.8 vs. 34.8, P=0.003 and 75.8 vs. 26.1%, P=0.005, respectively). The PPDD group showed higher NRS scores than the PRF group at 1 month after surgery (3 vs. 2, P<0.0001) and lower NRS scores than the PRF group at 6 months after surgery (2 vs. 3, P<0.0001). NDI scores in the PPDD group were significantly lower than those in the PRF group at 1, 3 and 6 months after surgery (15.49 vs. 20.05, P=0.002; 16.06 vs. 20.10, P=0.003 and 9.90 vs. 13.80, P=0.001, respectively). There was no significant difference in postoperative complication rate between the two groups (P>0.999). PPDD could significantly relieve CEH symptoms and upper extremity radicular pain in patients with CSR treated via a lower surgical approach and PPDD was more effective than PRF for long-term CEH remission and pain alleviation.

Transforaminal Steroid Injection After Dorsal Root Ganglion Pulsed Radiofrequency (DRG-PRF): Impact on Pain Intensity and Disability

INTRODUCTION

Dorsal root ganglion pulsed radiofrequency (DRG-PRF) is frequently used for the treatment of chronic lumbar radicular pain with good outcomes in terms of pain management. Transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) is often administered immediately after DRG-PRF to increase the anti-inflammatory effects, but support for the synergic mechanism is lacking in the literature. The aim of this study was to investigate the potential role of TFESI immediately after DRG-PRF and its possible role on pain intensity and patient disability.

METHODS

A database of patients who underwent DRG-PRF with or without TFESI immediately after DRG-PRF was retrospectively analysed; propensity score matching was applied to the analysis to reduce possible bias. Pain intensity (numerical rating scale [NRS]) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) were recorded pre-operatively and at the 1- and 3-month follow-up in the two groups of patients.

RESULTS

A total of 252 patients were included in this retrospective analysis, 126 patients in the DRG-PRF + TFESI group and 126 patients in the DRG-PRF group after propensity score matching. Both groups displayed a significant reduction in pain intensity (NRS score reduction; p < 0.0001) and improvement in the ODI (p < 0.0001) from baseline at the 3-month follow-up. Interestingly, the use of TFESI after DRG-PRF was not associated with any clinical benefit as no difference in NRS and ODI was found between the two groups at the 1- and 3-month follow-ups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study revealed a significant pain reduction and disability improvement after DRG-PRF in patients with lumbar radicular pain. Interestingly, no positive role of TFESI immediately after DRG-PRF was observed. These findings suggest that DRG-PRF provides substantial pain relief, and no added benefit is obtained with subsequent steroid injection. Future prospective studies with expanded follow-up periods are needed to confirm these findings.

Pulsed radiofrequency of lumbar dorsal root ganglion for lumbar radicular pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) of the lumbar dorsal root ganglion (DRG) has been widely used as a method to relieve lumbar radicular pain (LRP). However, the value of PRF application in LRP patients remains uncertain. This systematic review aimed to compare the effects of PRF of lumbar DRG and LEI in patients with LRP.

METHODS

A literature search was performed using well-known databases for articles published up to May 2023. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects of PRF compared to LEI with or without steroids. We screened articles, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias in duplicate. The pain scores and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores at 1, 3, and 6 months after procedures were obtained. A random-effects meta-analysis model was applied for outcomes. We evaluated evidence certainty for each outcome using the GRADE scoring system. This review was registered in the PROSPERO (ID: CRD42021253628).

RESULTS

A total of 10 RCTs were included and data of 613 patients were retrieved. We assessed the overall quality of the evidence as very low to moderate. PRF showed no difference in pain scores at 1 (mean difference [MD] -0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.59 to 0.00, low certainty) and 6 months (MD -2.37, 95% CI -4.79 to 0.05, very low certainty), and significantly improved pain scores at 3 months (MD -1.31, 95% CI -2.29 to -0.33, low certainty). There was no significant difference in ODI score at any interval (very low to low certainty). In the subgroup who underwent a diagnostic block, did not use steroids, and PRF duration greater than 360 s, PRF significantly reduced pain scores at 3 months after procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

We found low quality of the evidence supporting adjuvant PRF to the lumbar DRG has a greater analgesic effect at 3 months after procedures in patients with LRP than LEI. We identified no convincing evidence to show that this treatment improves function. High-quality evidence is lacking, and data were largely derived from short-term effects. Given these limitations, high-quality trials with data on long-term effects are needed.

Comparing the effectiveness of pulsed radiofrequency treatment to lumbar dorsal root ganglion according to application times in patients with lumbar radicular pain: protocol for a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Lumbar radicular pain (LRP) is a common symptom characterised by a sharp, shooting or lancinating sensation localised to one or more dermatomes of the lumbar spine. Despite its high prevalence and significant impact on quality of life, the most effective conservative treatment for patients with LRP remains uncertain. When conventional treatment methods do not provide satisfactory results, the option of using epidural steroids and/or pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) treatment may be considered as a secondary approach for managing the condition. Ongoing advances in the field have led to a wide range of PRF parameters being investigated and extensively documented. Therefore, this study will aim to evaluate the treatment efficacy, sustainability and adverse effects of PRF application for different durations in patients with LRP.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study will be a double-blind, randomised, controlled trial. Eligible patients with LRP who visit the International St. Mary's Hospital pain clinic in Korea will be assigned to three groups (1:1:1 ratio) based on the duration of PRF application: 240, 360 and 480 s. Outcome measures will include an assessment of radicular pain intensity, physical function, global improvement, treatment satisfaction and adverse events. The primary outcome will be a Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) score 3 months after the procedure. The secondary outcomes will be the number of subjects in each group reporting successful treatment defined as a significant decrease of NRS or improved physical function score or high satisfaction at the 3 and 6 months follow-up. X2 or Fisher's exact test and one-way analysis of variance will be used to compare the outcomes.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This trial was approved by the Ethics Committee of Catholic Kwandong University International St. Mary's Hospital (IS23EISE0018). The findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and at scientific conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

KCT0008612.

Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of day surgery for cervical disc herniation treated with low temperature plasma radiofrequency ablation

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the clinical efficacy of patients with cervical disc herniation (CDH) treated by low-temperature plasma radiofrequency ablation (LTP-RFA) as day surgery with traditional inpatients.

METHODS

According to the selection criteria, single-segment mild to moderate CDH patients who received LTP-RFA from January 2020 to December 2021 were divided into day surgery procedure (DSP) group and a traditional inpatient procedure (TIP) group. The visual analogue score (VAS) and modified Japanese Orthopedic Association score (mJOA) of neurological function of patients in the two groups were recorded at the time of preoperative, and one day, three months, six months after surgery and the last follow-up respectively. The gender, age, responsible segment, surgical complications, hospitalization time, hospitalization expenses, and patient satisfaction were recorded and analyzed for both groups. The modified Macnab standard was used to evaluate the postoperative efficacy at one month and six months after operation.

RESULTS

A total of 127 patients (75 in DSP;52 in TIP) with complete data were enrolled and completed six month follow-up. There were no statistically significant pre-treatment VAS scores and mJOA scores in the two groups (P>0.05). The postoperative VAS and mJOA scores in both groups were improved after surgery (P<0.05). However, there was no significant difference in VAS scores and mJOA scores between the two groups in the same postoperative period (all P > 0.05). The efficacy of MacNab was similar one month and six months after operation (P > 0.05). The hospitalization time and hospitalization cost were significantly lower in DSP group (all P<0.05). As the treatment effects were comparable, patients in both groups were similarly satisfied at discharge.

CONCLUSION

LTP-RFA is an effective method for the treatment of mild to moderate CDH. We suggest that the application of LTP-RFA in DSP for mild to moderate CDH is worthy of wide application.

Efficacy of High-Voltage Pulsed Radiofrequency of the Dorsal Root Ganglion for Treatment of Chronic Lumbosacral Radicular Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) is an efficacious treatment for patients with lumbosacral radicular pain, but the optimal radiofrequency parameters are inadequately described. We hypothesized that high-voltage radiofrequency therapy around the dorsal root ganglion can be more effective and enduring than the standard voltage PRF therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a prospective and randomized study. Patients were divided into two groups. In group 1 (high-voltage group), PRF was applied at 60 V to the patients. Patients in group 2 (low-voltage group) received PRF treatment at 45 V. The patients were evaluated using a numeric rating scale (NRS) and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Evaluation scales were repeated before the intervention and at the first and sixth months after the treatment.

RESULTS

The study included 41 analyzed patients. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups at the first-month NRS (p > 0.05). Sixth-month NRS scores were lower in the high-voltage group (p = 0.016). The groups showed no statistically significant differences in the one-month ODI scores (p > 0.05). When the NRS values were analyzed with linear regression, a positive correlation was found between the sixth-month NRS values and high-voltage PRF (odds ratio: 0.385; p = 0.013). Comparison of the treatment success in terms of time showed statistically significant results in both groups in the first and sixth months (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of our study revealed that both low- and high-voltage PRF are effective. Because of the lower sixth-month NRS values in the high-voltage group and the similar complication rate, it was considered that high-voltage PRF can be a promising application.

2. Cervical radicular pain

INTRODUCTION

Cervical radicular pain is pain perceived in the upper limb, caused by irritation or compression of a cervical spine nerve, the roots of the nerve, or both.

METHODS

The literature on the diagnosis and treatment of cervical radicular pain was retrieved and summarized.

RESULTS

The diagnosis is made by combining elements from the patient's history, physical examination, and supplementary tests. The Spurling and shoulder abduction tests are the two most common examinations used to identify cervical radicular pain. MRI without contrast, CT scanning, and in some cases plain radiography can all be appropriate imaging techniques for nontraumatic cervical radiculopathy. MRI is recommended prior to interventional treatments. Exercise with or without other treatments can be beneficial. There is scant evidence for the use of paracetamol, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and neuropathic pain medications such as gabapentin, pregabalin, tricyclic antidepressants, and anticonvulsants for the treatment of radicular pain. Acute and subacute cervical radicular pain may respond well to epidural corticosteroid administration, preferentially using an interlaminar approach. By contrast, for chronic cervical radicular pain, the efficacy of epidural corticosteroid administration is limited. In these patients, pulsed radiofrequency treatment adjacent to the dorsal root ganglion may be considered.

CONCLUSIONS

There is currently no gold standard for the diagnosis of cervical radicular pain. There is scant evidence for the use of medication. Epidural corticosteroid injection and pulsed radiofrequency adjacent to the dorsal root ganglion may be considered. [Correction added on 12 June 2023, after first online publication: The preceding sentence was corrected.].

Deep Learning Algorithm Trained on Cervical Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Predict Outcomes of Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injection for Radicular Pain from Cervical Foraminal Stenosis

PURPOSE

A convolutional neural network (CNN) is one of the representative deep learning (DL) model that is especially useful for image recognition and classification. In the current study, using cervical axial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data obtained prior to transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI), we developed a CNN model to predict the therapeutic outcome of cervical TFESI in patients with cervical foraminal stenosis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively recruited 288 patients with cervical foraminal stenosis who received cervical TFESI due to cervical radicular pain. We collected single T2-axial spine MR image obtained from each patient. The image showing narrowest width of the neural foramen in the level at which TFESI was performed was used for input data. A "favor outcome" was defined as a ≥ 50% reduction in the NRS score at 2 months post-TFESI vs the pretreatment NRS score. A "poor outcome" was defined as a < 50% reduction in the NRS score at 2 months post-TFESI vs the pretreatment score.

RESULTS

The area under the curve of our developed model for predicting therapeutic outcome of cervical TFESI in patients with cervical spinal stenosis was 0.801.

CONCLUSION

We showed that a CNN model trained using cervical axial MRI could be helpful for predicting therapeutic outcome after cervical TFESI in patients with cervical foraminal stenosis.

CT-guided Pulsed Radiofrequency Combined with Steroid Injection for Sciatica from Herniated Disk: A Randomized Trial

Background Evidence regarding effective nonsurgical management of sciatica remains limited. Purpose To determine a difference in effectiveness between combined pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) and transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) treatment versus TFESI alone for sciatic pain due to lumbar disk herniation. Materials and Methods This prospective multicenter double-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted between February 2017 and September 2019 in participants with sciatica due to lumbar disk herniation lasting 12 weeks or longer that was not responsive to conservative treatment. Study participants were randomly assigned to undergo one CT-guided treatment with combined PRF and TFESI (n = 174) or TFESI alone (n = 177). The primary outcome was leg pain severity, as assessed with the numeric rating scale (NRS) (range, 0-10) at weeks 1 and 52 after treatment. Secondary outcomes included Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) score (range, 0-24) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score (range, 0-100). Outcomes were analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle via linear regression. Results Mean age of the 351 participants (223 men) was 55 years ± 16 (SD). At baseline, NRS was 8.1 ± 1.1 in the PRF and TFESI group and 7.9 ± 1.1 in the TFESI group. NRS was 3.2 ± 0.2 in the PRF and TFESI group and 5.4 ± 0.2 in the TFESI group (average treatment effect, 2.3; 95% CI: 1.9, 2.8; P < .001) at week 1 and 1.0 ± 0.2 and 3.9 ± 0.2 (average treatment effect, 3.0; 95% CI: 2.4, 3.5; P < .001), respectively, at week 52. At week 52, the average treatment effect was 11.0 (95% CI: 6.4, 15.6; P < .001) for ODI and 2.9 (95% CI: 1.6, 4.3; P < .001) for RMDQ, favoring the combined PRF and TFSEI group. Adverse events were reported in 6% (10 of 167) of participants in the PRF and TFESI group and in 3% (six of 176) of participants in the TFESI group (eight participants did not complete follow-up questionnaires). No severe adverse events occurred. Conclusion In the treatment of sciatica caused by lumbar disk herniation, pulsed radiofrequency combined with transforaminal epidural steroid injection is more effective for pain relief and disability improvement than steroid injection alone. © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Jennings in this issue.

Comparison of efficacy according to voltage of pulsed radiofrequency treatment to lumbar dorsal root ganglion in patient with lumbar radiculopathy: Pilot study

BACKGROUND

Lumbar radicular pain (LRP) is a common symptom, but a challenging clinical problem. Pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) is a more recently developed technique that uses short pulses of radiofrequency current with intervals of longer pauses to prevent temperature from rising to the level of permanent tissue damage and has been advocated in treatment of such patients. But there were no comparative studies on the analgesic effects according to output voltage during PRF in patients with LRP. The goal of this study is to determine the clinical effect of high-voltage (60V) versus standard-voltage (45V) PRF of lumbar dorsal root ganglion.

METHODS/DESIGN

This study will be a prospective, double-blind randomized controlled pilot study. In this study, total 20 patients will be recruited and distributed equally into 2 groups: high-voltage (60V) PRF, low-voltage (45V) PRF. Outcomes will be radicular pain intensity; physical functioning; global improvement and satisfaction with treatment; and adverse events. The assessments will be performed at the 3-month follow-up period after the end of the treatments. The findings will be analyzed statistically considering a 5% significance level (P ≤ .05).

DISCUSSION

The results of this trial will help determine which voltage could be applied for PRF to dorsal root ganglion in LRP and be a basis for subsequent trials.

The mechanism of action of pulsed radiofrequency in reducing pain: a narrative review

Pain from nervous or musculoskeletal disorders is one of the most common complaints in clinical practice. Corticosteroids have a high pain-reducing effect, and their injection is generally used to control various types of pain. However, they have various adverse effects including flushing, hyperglycemia, allergic reactions, menstrual changes, immunosuppression, and adrenal suppression. Pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) is known to have a pain-reducing effect similar to that of corticosteroid injection, with nearly no major side effects. Therefore, it has been widely used to treat various types of pain, such as neuropathic, joint, discogenic, and muscle pain. In the current review, we outlined the pain-reducing mechanisms of PRF by reviewing previous studies. When PRF was first introduced, it was supposed to reduce pain by long-term depression of pain signaling from the peripheral nerve to the central nervous system. In addition, deactivation of microglia at the level of the spinal dorsal horn, reduction of proinflammatory cytokines, increased endogenous opioid precursor messenger ribonucleic acid, enhancement of noradrenergic and serotonergic descending pain inhibitory pathways, suppression of excitation of C-afferent fibers, and microscopic damage of nociceptive C- and A-delta fibers have been found to contribute to pain reduction after PRF application. However, the pain-reducing mechanism of PRF has not been clearly and definitely elucidated. Further studies are warranted to clarify the pain-reducing mechanism of PRF.

Comparison between ultrasound-guided monopolar and bipolar pulsed radiofrequency treatment for refractory chronic cervical radicular pain: A randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Many patients complain of chronic cervical radicular pain, and pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) is known to have a positive effect for alleviating neuropathic pain.

OBJECTIVES

In the present study, we used ultrasound (US) guidance and compared the effects of monopolar PRF with those of bipolar PRF in patients with chronic cervical radicular pain refractory to repeated transforaminal epidural steroid injections.

METHODS

Sixty-six patients with chronic cervical radicular pain were included in this study. Patients were randomly assigned to one of the two groups: monopolar or bipolar PRF group (n= 33 per group). Pain intensity was evaluated using a numeric rating scale (NRS) at pretreatment, and at 1 and 3 months after the treatment. Target stimulation site was the extraforaminal nerve root.

RESULTS

Compared to the pretreatment NRS scores, patients in both groups showed a significant decrease in NRS scores at 1 and 3 months after the treatment. Reductions in the NRS scores over time were significantly larger in the bipolar PRF group. Three months after the treatment, 18 patients (54.5%) in the monopolar PRF group and 27 (81.8%) in the bipolar PRF group reported successful pain relief (pain relief of ⩾50%).

CONCLUSIONS

US-guided PRF can be an effective interventional technique for the management of chronic refractory cervical radiculopathy. Moreover, bipolar PRF has better treatment outcome than monopolar PRF.

Investigation of Effectiveness of Pulsed Radiofrequency With Multifunctional Epidural Electrode for Low Back Pain

Aim: Low back pain affects many people at some point in their life. Whenever pharmacologic and other conservative treatments of chronic pain fail, ablative and interventional methods are attempted on the assumption that interrupting nerve conduction prevents central pain cognition. Pulsed radiofrequency using multifunctional epidural electrodes can be used for multiple etiologies of chronic low back and leg pain with a low complication rate and minimal side effects. Methods: The records of the 188 patients who underwent pulsed radiofrequency with multifunctional epidural electrode between October 2014 and March 2017 in Algology clinic were examined retrospectively. Visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, response to straight leg raising test (SLR), lumbar range of motion, analgesic use, patient satisfaction score, need for open operation or other interventional procedure were collected.

Results: VAS and SLR tests were found to be significantly improved compared with the preoperative values. The VAS scores at the 10th day and first, third and sixth months were significantly decreased compared to baseline scores (p<0.001). Also, SLR tests were significantly improved compared to baseline scores at the same intervals (p<0.001).

Conclusion: Pulsed radiofrequency with multifunctional epidural electrode is a safe and effective method for low back pain which is caused by several pathologies.

Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injection Improves Neuropathic Pain in Lumbar Radiculopathy: A Prospective, Clinical Study

Objective

This study aims to evaluate the effects of transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) on neuropathic pain (NP) in patients with chronic unilateral radiculopathy due to lumbar disc herniation (LDH).

Patients and Methods

Between September 2018 and April 2019, a total of 61 patients who were diagnosed with unilateral/unilevel radiculopathy due to LDH and were scheduled for single-level TFESI were included in this study. The Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), modified Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), and NP-Douleur Neuropathique 4 Questionnaire (DN4) were used before the procedure and at 1 hour, 3 weeks, and 3 months after the procedure.

Results

There was a significant decrease in the NRS and significant improvement in the ODI, BDI, and DN4 scores in all patients at all postprocedural timepoints (P < 0.05). The number of patients with NP decreased from 35 (60.3%) at baseline to 23 (41.2%) at 3 months (P = 0.001). The NRS scores were similar at 3 weeks and 3 months between the patients with and without NP (P > 0.05). The ODI scores were significantly higher at 3 months in the patients with NP than those without NP (P = 0.013). The BDI scores at baseline, 3 weeks, and 3 months were significantly higher in the patients with NP than those without NP (P < 0.001, P = 0.016, and P = 0.016, respectively).

Conclusion

Our study results suggest that TFESI is an effective and safe method to decrease not only nociceptive but also NP component in patients with chronic radiculopathy due to LDH. Clinicians should keep in mind that NP is a risk factor that adversely affects the TFESI success and patients should be evaluated before the procedure.

Randomized controlled trials between dorsal root ganglion thermal radiofrequency, pulsed radiofrequency and steroids for the management of intractable metastatic back pain in thoracic vertebral body

BACKGROUND

Bone metastasis is a complication of various cancers causing severe pain. The current modalities for the treatment of metastatic axial pain include pharmacological, surgical and vertebral augmentation techniques, each of which has its own challenges.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of pulsed radiofrequency (PRF), thermal radiofrequency (RF) and steroids on dorsal root ganglion (DRG) in patients with thoracic axial pain due to vertebral metastasis.

METHODS

In this randomized controlled prospective study, 140 patients were assessed for eligibility, of which only 69 fulfilled the criteria. Patients were randomly divided into three equal groups, PRF, RF and steroid.

RESULTS

During the assessment of pain using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Opioid consumption using oral Morphine Equivalence (OME) and Analgesic Quantification Algorithm (AQA) - at baseline, 1 week, 1 month and 3 months - 81 patients were assessed for final eligibility, of which 12 were excluded before intervention due to drop-out. The remaining 69 were randomized (mean age: 53.87 ± 10.55, 55.78 ± 7.34 and 59.39 ± 13.72) for PRF, RF and steroid, respectively with no statistical difference. VAS% and ODI% decreased significantly at 3 months in RF group (p <0.001, 0.014, respectively), as did the AQA (p <0.027). Steroid group was the worst.

DISCUSSION

RF on DRG is the main stay for controlling intractable metastatic pain. PRF is a good alternative.

YouTube as a Source of Information on Epidural Steroid Injection

OBJECTIVE

With the advance of the internet, social media platforms have become a major source of medical information. We assessed the reliability, quality, and usefulness of the most-viewed YouTube videos of epidural steroid injection (ESI).

METHODS

A search was conducted on YouTube on February 13, 2020, using the keywords "epidural injection," "epidural steroid injection," "epidural transforaminal injection," and "epidural transforaminal steroid injection." The top 50 most-viewed videos were assessed with a modified DISCERN scale (mDISCERN) and a Global Quality Scale (GQS). Further, the usefulness of information in each video was evaluated.

RESULTS

Only 22% of videos contained information with high reliability, and these were produced by hospitals or physicians. None of the videos provided by media organizations and patients were reliable. As for information quality, only 34% were moderate to excellent quality. Even of the videos produced by hospitals or physicians, approximately half were of generally poor or poor quality. Regarding the usefulness of information, although 76% were assessed to contain useful information, 8% had misleading information. Particularly, four of these videos contained misleading information, and three were provided by patients who experienced ESI.

CONCLUSION

YouTube is a platform where medical information is actively shared and widespread. Here, we found that the reliability and quality of videos were low even when these were produced by hospitals or physicians. Further, the quality tended to be much lower when it was provided by media organizations or patients. Future efforts by physicians and professional societies to improve the reliability and quality of medical content are necessary.

Efficacy and Safety of Pulsed Radiofrequency as a Method of Dorsal Root Ganglia Stimulation in Patients with Neuropathic Pain: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) is a nonablative pain treatment that uses radiofrequency current in short high-voltage bursts, resulting in interruption of nociceptive afferent pathways. We conducted a systematic review with the aim to create a synthesis of evidence about the efficacy and safety of PRF applied to the dorsal root ganglion (DRG) for the treatment of neuropathic pain.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, and PsycINFO through January 8, 2019, as well as ClinicalTrials.gov and the clinical trial register of the World Health Organization. All study designs were eligible. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane tool for randomized controlled trials and the Risk Of Bias In Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I). We assessed level of evidence using the Oxford tool and quality of evidence with GRADE.

RESULTS

We included 28 studies with participants suffering from lumbosacral, cervical, or thoracic radicular pain, post-herpetic neuralgia, neuropathicbone pain in cancer patients, or carpal tunnel syndrome. Only five studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), while others were of nonrandomized designs, predominantly before and after comparisons. A total of 991 participants were included, with a median number (range) of 31 (1-101) participants. Only 204 participants were included in the RCTs, with a median number (range) of 38 (23-62) participants. The overall quality of evidence was low, as the majority of the included studies were rated as evidence level 4 or 5. The quality of evidence was very low.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence about the efficacy and safety of PRF of the DRG for the treatment of neuropathic pain is based mainly on results from very small studies with low evidence quality. Current research results about the benefits of PRF of the DRG for the treatment of neuropathic pain should be considered preliminary and confirmed in high-quality RCTs with sufficient numbers of participants.

The Effect of Pulsed Radiofrequency on Radicular Pain in Lumbal Herniated Nucleus Pulposus: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Context

Radiofrequency therapy is a medical procedure mainly used to reduce pain with a low complication rate (less than 1%), ease of application, and low cost. This review's objective was to (1) evaluate the pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) effectiveness in treating radicular pain and (2) assess the PRF procedure's safety in managing radicular pain in lumbar herniated nucleus pulposus (HNP).

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis. A tertiary care center and an academic medical center. Six full articles with the following features were selected for this review: (1) Articles published in English; (2) studies on the PRF effect on radicular pain in lumbar HNP; and (3) randomized control trials.

Results

The studies showed that the PRF group had a reduction in pain scores at each evaluation. In four of the studies, the PRF group showed a more significant reduction in pain scores than the control, and in two of the studies, the reduction in pain scores was not significant in the PRF group compared to the control. An adverse effect was reported in one patient experiencing increased radicular pain after PRF. Lack of data required for statistical analysis, and lack use of a uniform duration for the PRF procedure by all the studies.

Conclusions

PRF can be used as a promising clinical recommendation for pain management with minimally invasive radicular pain techniques due to lumbar HNP.

Expert consensus of Chinese Association for the Study of Pain on the radiofrequency therapy technology in the Department of Pain

On the basis of continuous improvement in recent years, radiofrequency therapy technology has been widely developed, and has become an effective method for the treatment of various intractable pain. Radiofrequency therapy is a technique that uses special equipment and puncture needles to output ultra-high frequency radio waves and accurately act on local tissues. In order to standardize the application of radiofrequency technology in the treatment of painful diseases, Chinese Association for the Study of Pain (CASP) has developed a consensus proposed by many domestic experts and scholars.

Does the presence of neuropathic pain affect the outcomes of the interlaminar epidural steroid injection for cervical disc herniation?: A prospective clinical study

Epidural steroid injections (ESI) are commonly performed for the treatment of chronic cervical disc herniation (CDH). Although they are considered to be effective for both nociceptive and neuropathic types of pain, there is a lack of data regarding the impact of neuropathic pain (NP) and nociceptive pain components on treatment outcomes. The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of interlaminar epidural steroid injection (ILESI) between patients with predominantly NP and nociceptive pain due to CDH.Sixty five participants were initially included in the study and assessed by numeric rating scale (NRS), neck pain and disability scale (NPDS), short form-12 (SF-12), and self-reported Leeds assessment of neuropathic symptoms and signs (S-LANSS) pain scale at baseline and 1 month, 3 months, 6 months after ILESI.All patients were evaluated at 1st month and 3rd month follow-up periods while 54 of patients achieved to complete 6th month follow-up. There were significant improvements in all outcome measures for all time periods when compared with the pre-intervention scores. At baseline 24 (36.9%) of patients had predominantly NP in accordance with S-LANSS pain scale. The ratio of NP predominant patients reduced to 7.6% at 1st month, 12.3% at 3rd month, and 12.9% at 6th month with a significant difference for each follow-up period when compared with the baseline. Although all NRS and NPDS scores at baseline were significantly higher in patients with NP, improvement was significant at all follow-up periods in both groups. Minimal clinically important change in NRS was observed in >75% of patients at 1st, 3rd, and 6th month in both groups.The results of this study showed that NP is present in one-third of the patients suffering from neck and radiating arm pain due to CDH and cervical ILESI is an effective treatment approach for both neuropathic and nociceptive components of pain.Clinical Trials Registration Number: NCT04235478.

Comparison of Pulsed Radiofrequency, Oxygen-Ozone Therapy and Epidural Steroid Injections for the Treatment of Chronic Unilateral Radicular Syndrome

Background and objectives: For the treatment of chronic unilateral radicular syndrome, there are various methods including three minimally invasive computed tomography (CT)-guided methods, namely, pulsed radiofrequency (PRF), transforaminal oxygen ozone therapy (TFOOT), and transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI). Despite this, it is still unclear which of these methods is the best in terms of pain reduction and disability improvement. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the short and long-term effectiveness of these methods by measuring pain relief using the visual analogue scale (VAS) and improvement in disability (per the Oswestry disability index (ODI)) in patients with chronic unilateral radicular syndrome at L5 or S1 that do not respond to conservative treatment. Materials and Methods: After screening 692 patients, we enrolled 178 subjects, each of whom underwent one of the above CT-guided procedures. The PRF settings were as follows: pulse width = 20 ms, f = 2 Hz, U = 45 V, Z ˂ 500 Ω, and interval = 2 × 120 s. For TFOOT, an injection of 4–5 mL of an O₂-O₃ mixture (24 μg/mL) was administered. For the TFESI, 1 mL of a corticosteroid (betamethasone dipropionate), 3 mL of an anaesthetic (bupivacaine hydrochloride), and a 0.5 mL mixture of a non-ionic contrast agent (Iomeron 300) were administered. Pain intensity was assessed with a questionnaire. Results: The data from 178 patients (PRF, n = 57; TFOOT, n = 69; TFESI, n = 52) who submitted correctly completed questionnaires in the third month of the follow-up period were used for statistical analysis. The median pre-treatment visual analogue scale (VAS) score in all groups was six points. Immediately after treatment, the largest decrease in the median VAS score was observed in the TFESI group, with a score of 3.5 points (a decrease of 41.7%). In the PRF and TFOOT groups, the median VAS score decreased to 4 and 5 points (decreases of 33% and 16.7%, respectively). The difference in the early (immediately after) post-treatment VAS score between the TFESI and TFOOT groups was statistically significant (p = 0.0152). At the third and sixth months after treatment, the median VAS score was five points in all groups, without a statistically significant difference (p > 0.05). Additionally, there were no significant differences in the Oswestry disability index (ODI) values among the groups at any of the follow-up visits. Finally, there were no significant effects of age or body mass index (BMI) on both treatment outcomes (maximum absolute value of Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient = 0.193). Conclusions: Although the three methods are equally efficient in reducing pain over the entire follow-up, we observed that TFESI (a corticosteroid with a local anaesthetic) proved to be the most effective method for early post-treatment pain relief.

A Literature Review of Dorsal Root Entry Zone Complex (DREZC) Lesions: Integration of Translational Data for an Evolution to More Accurate Nomenclature

The purpose of this translational review was to provide evidence to support the natural evolution of the nomenclature of neuromodulatory and neuroablative radiofrequency lesions for pain management from lesions of individualized components of the linear dorsal afferent pathway to “Dorsal Root Entry Zone Complex (DREZC) lesions.” Literature review was performed to collate anatomic and procedural data and correlate these data to clinical outcomes. There is ample evidence that the individual components of the DREZC (the dorsal rami and its branches, the dorsal root ganglia, the dorsal rootlets, and the dorsal root entry zone) vary dramatically between vertebral levels and individual patients. Procedurally, fluoroscopy, the most commonly utilized technology is a 2-dimensional x-ray-based technology without the ability to accurately locate any one component of the DREZC dorsal afferent pathway, which results in clinical inaccuracies when naming each lesion. Despite the inherent anatomic variability and these procedural limitations, the expected poor clinical outcomes that might follow such nomenclature inaccuracies have not been shown to be prominent, likely because these are all lesions of the same anatomically linear sensory pathway, the DREZC, whereby a lesion in any one part of the pathway would be expected to interrupt sensory transmission of pain to all subsequent more proximal segments. Given that the common clinically available tools (fluoroscopy) are inaccurate to localize each component of the DREZC, it would be inappropriate to continue to erroneously refer to these lesions as lesions of individual components, when the more accurate “DREZC lesions” designation can be utilized. Hence, to avoid inaccuracies in nomenclature and until more accurate imaging technology is commonly utilized, the evidence herein supports the proposed change to this more sensitive and inclusive nomenclature, “DREZC lesions.”

Point your SmartPhone at the code above. If you have a QR code reader the video abstract will appear. Or use:

https://youtu.be/BVBDOHy-eAI.

STUDY PROTOCOL - pulsed radiofrequency in addition to transforaminal epidural steroid injection in patients with acute and subacute sciatica due to lumbosacral disc herniation: rationale and design of a phase III, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial

Lumbosacral disc herniation (LDH) represents the most common cause of sciatica. Currently, there is limited evidence about minimally invasive interventional therapies for the treatment of this condition. This paper presents the protocol for a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled, phase III trial evaluating if PRF in addition to TFESI leads to better outcomes in patients with sciatica due to LDH, compared to TFESI alone, during the first year after treatment (Pulsed Radiofrequency in Addition to TFESI for Sciatica [PRATS]). Eligible patients are between 18 and 75 years of age, suffer from sciatica of less than 12-week duration with pain intensity >4 on the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and have unilateral LDH compatible with symptoms at MRI. The Medical Ethics Committee of participating hospitals approved the study protocol. Patients will be randomized to receive either combined treatment (PRF and TFESI) or TFESI alone. The primary outcome will be the assessment of pain intensity with VAS at different timepoints from week-1 to 52 after treatment; secondary outcomes will include Roland Disability Questionnaire for sciatica and Oswestry Disability Index, evaluated at 4, 12 and 52 weeks. The follow-up will last 52 weeks for each patient. Statistical analysis will be performed on a per-protocol basis.

At Least 5-Year Follow-up After Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injection Due to Lumbar Radicular Pain Caused by Spinal Stenosis

OBJECTIVES

Transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) can be used to control radicular pain following lumber spinal stenosis (LSS). However, limited information is available on the long-term prognosis of TFESI in patients with LSS.

METHODS

Of the 90 patients who underwent TFESI for controlling LSS-induced radicular pain at least 5 years previously, 54 patients completed a phone interview. We inquired about their degree of pain during walking or standing, current oral medication used for radicular pain, current TFESI injections, progression to surgery, and unemployment due to pain at least 5 years after the TFESI for LSS-induced radicular pain.

RESULTS

Five to seven years after the initial TFESI, the numeric rating scale (NRS) score had decreased from 6.7 to 3.7. Of the included patients, approximately 65% of the patients had an NRS score of ≥3, although roughly 15% of patients reported complete resolution of the initial pain. Approximately half of the included patients were currently receiving repetitive TFESIs every 2 to 6 months or were taking oral pain medications. Further, approximately 25% of the patients had undergone a surgical intervention; however, its outcome was poor.

CONCLUSION

The prognosis after TFESI for controlling LSS-induced radicular pain is thought to be relatively poor. However, considering poor long-term outcome and complications after surgery, we believe that TFESI is worth considering as a safe modality for controlling radicular pain following LSS.

Conservative Treatments Frequently Used for Chronic Pain Patients in Clinical Practice: A Literature Review

Chronic pain is a common patient complaint in clinical practice. It results in the deterioration of patients' quality of life and loss of productivity. Also, it often brings about psychiatric disorders such as depression and anxiety. Therefore, clinicians should manage chronic pain actively. Various conservative treatments, including pharmacological therapy, procedures, and exercise, are being used to control chronic pain. In this review article, I provide an overview of the commonly used treatments, including medication [anticonvulsants, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioids, antidepressants], procedures [injection of steroids and local anesthetics, pulsed radiofrequency (PRF), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), prolotherapy], and exercise. A brief overview of these treatments would allow clinicians to have an overall picture of the available tools for managing chronic pain in clinical practice at a glance.

Acupotomy versus Manual Acupuncture for the Treatment of Back and/or Leg Pain in Patients with Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled, Assessor-Blinded Clinical Trial

Background

Acupotomy, which involves the addition of a scalpel function to the conventional acupuncture treatment, has recently been applied as a conservative treatment method for lumbar disc herniation (LDH). This study investigated the effectiveness and safety of acupotomy, compared to manual acupuncture, for the treatment of patients with LDH.

Methods

A total of 146 patients diagnosed with LDH were randomly assigned to either the acupotomy group or the manual acupuncture group at a 1:1 ratio. Participants in both groups received four sessions of each intervention over 2 weeks. Outcome assessments based on the visual analog scale (VAS), Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), Modified-Modified Schober Test (MMST), EuroQol Five Dimensions (EQ-5D), clinically important difference (CID), and patient global impression of change (PGIC) were conducted at baseline and at 2, 4, and 6 weeks post-randomization.

Results

The acupotomy group showed significant improvement in VAS and MMST at 2, 4, and 6 weeks than did the manual acupuncture group. RMDQ was significantly different between the two groups at 2 and 6 weeks. In EQ-5D, there was no significant difference between the two groups. The proportion of patients with ≥15 mm decrease on the VAS (minimal CID) was significantly higher in the acupotomy group at weeks 2 and 4. Better improvement in the PGIC at week 4 was also observed in the acupotomy group. Post-intervention muscle pain was reported, but there was no serious adverse event related to interventions.

Conclusion

In this study, four sessions of acupotomy treatment were found to be effective in improving the pain intensity and range of motion of the lumbar region in patients with LDH. Despite post-treatment muscle pain, acupotomy treatment can be considered a preferred treatment method over manual acupuncture.

Trial Registration

This trial has been registered 24 April 2018 in Clinical Research Information Service of South Korea (CRIS-KCT0002824).

Electrocatheter-mediated High-voltage Pulsed Radiofrequency of the Dorsal Root Ganglion in the Treatment of Chronic Lumbosacral Neuropathic Pain: A Randomized Controlled Study

OBJECTIVES

Despite the interest in scientific community, there is still poor evidence about pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) efficacy in the treatment of neuropathic pain. In order to determine whether high-voltage PRF and epidural adhesiolysis (PRF-EA) showed better results than epidural adhesiolysis alone (EA), a randomized, double-blind, comparative-effectiveness study was conducted in patients with chronic lumbosacral radiating pain and neuropathic features.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 41 patients were randomly allocated to 2 groups. Twenty-one patients were randomized to receive 2 cycles of 240 seconds high-voltage PRF followed by the injection of local anesthetics, hyaluronidase, and betamethasone, whereas 20 patients underwent sham stimulation followed by adhesiolysis. The treatment was delivered at the affected lumbosacral roots and patients, treating physicians and assessors were blinded to intervention.

RESULTS

A significant reduction of radiating pain was observed in mean Numeric Rating Scale score at follow-up. A change of -3.43 versus -1.75 (P=0.031) after 1 month and -3.34 versus -0.80 (P=0.005) after 6 months was reported in patients undergoing PRF-EA in comparison with EA, respectively. After 1 month, 57% of patients in the PRF-EA group experienced a pain reduction of ≥50% versus only 25% of patients allocated to EA (P=0.037). Improvement decreased to 48% in the PRF-EA group whereas only 10% of EA reported significant pain relief after 6 months (P=0.008).

DISCUSSION

High-voltage PRF of dorsal root ganglion delivered through multifunctional electrode provided significant pain relief and may be considered a valuable treatment in chronic lumbosacral radicular pain with neuropathic features.

Clinical effectiveness of caudal epidural pulsed radiofrequency stimulation in managing refractory chronic leg pain in patients with postlumbar surgery syndrome

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the effect of caudal epidural pulsed radiofrequency stimulation in patients with chronic lumbosacral radicular pain due to postlumbar surgery syndrome who were unresponsive to at least two epidural steroid injections through the interlaminar, transforaminal, or caudal route.

METHODS

We recruited 25 patients with chronic persistent radicular pain in one or both legs (⩾ 4 on the Numeric Rating Scale [NRS]) despite spinal surgery. They were unresponsive to at least two epidural steroid injections. We retrospectively conducted this study. Electrode needles were placed into the epidural space (S2-3 intervertebral level) through the sacral hiatus, and pulsed radiofrequency stimulation was administered. The outcomes were evaluated using the NRS scores for radicular pain before treatment and 1-3 months after treatment. Successful pain relief was defined as a ⩾ 50% reduction in the scores at 3 months after treatment.

RESULTS

The pain scores changed significantly over time (p< 0.001): pretreatment, 4.9 ± 0.9; 1 month, 3.6 ± 1.4; 2 months, 3.8 ± 1.4; and 3 months, 3.9 ± 1.4. At 1, 2, and 3 months after pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) procedure, the NRS scores were significantly reduced compared with the scores before the treatment. Eight patients (32%) reported successful pain relief at 3 months after treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Although only 32% of the patients with postlumbar surgery syndrome showed successful pain relief after treatment, the result is encouraging because we recruited only patients unresponsive to repeated epidural steroid injections.

Translocation of AMPA Receptors in the Dorsal Horn of the Spinal Cord Corresponding to Long-term Depression Following Pulsed Radiofrequency Stimulation at the Dorsal Root Ganglion

Objective

Pulsed radiofrequency stimulation at the dorsal root ganglion is used for treatment of radicular pain; however, its mechanism for neuropathic pain treatment has not been fully elucidated. Here, we investigated whether pulsed radiofrequency stimulation affects the α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid (AMPA) receptors, which play a critical role in synaptic plasticity.

Methods

Neuropathic pain was studied using a radicular neuropathic pain model (43 female Sprague-Dawley rats; 200–250 g). In total, 28 rats were assigned to the following groups for fraction analysis: a control group, a control + pulsed radiofrequency stimulation group, a disc pain group, and a disc pain + pulsed radiofrequency stimulation group. For nonfraction analysis of Glutamate A1 (GluA1) and GluA2 subunits, a total of 15 female Sprague-Dawley rats were assigned to a control group, a disc pain group, and a disc pain + pulsed radiofrequency stimulation group. Pulsed radiofrequency stimulation and subsequent analysis were conducted three days after surgery.

Results

AMPA receptor subunits, GluA1 and GluA2, in the radicular neuropathic pain model were upregulated compared with those in the control group three days after surgery. Pulsed radiofrequency stimulation induced the translocation of GluA1 and GluA2 subunits from the synaptosome to cytosol without a change in the total amount of AMPA receptors in the dorsal horn.

Conclusions

Our results demonstrated that pulsed radiofrequency stimulation affected the synaptic plasticity corresponding to long-term depression. Thus, we show that long-term depression from pulsed radiofrequency stimulation is associated with analgesic effects in the radicular neuropathic pain model following peripheral inflammation.

Outcome of intra-articular lumbar facet joint corticosteroid injection according to the severity of facet joint arthritis

Lumbar facet joint osteoarthritis (FJOA) caused by degenerative change(s) is considered to be the main cause of facet joint-origin low back pain (LBP). Intra-articular lumbar facet joint (IA LFJ) corticosteroid injection is widely used for controlling pain induced by FJOA. In the current study, the outcomes of IA LFJ corticosteroid injection were evaluated according to the severity of FJOA. A total of 50 patients who received IA LFJ corticosteroid injections for the treatment of LFJ pain were recruited. Patients were classified into three groups according to the severity of FJOA, which was indicated during a lumbar axial MRI. A total of 10 patients were assigned to group A (patients with mild FJOA), 27 to group B (patients with moderate FJOA) and 13 to group C (patients with severe FJOA). Pain intensity was evaluated using a numerical rating scale (NRS) prior to treatment and at 1, 2 and 3 months after treatment. A total of 26 (52%) patients experienced successful treatment outcomes (defined as >50% reduction in NRS score at 3 months). Patients in all groups demonstrated a significant decrease in NRS scores at 1, 2 and 3 months after IA LFJ corticosteroid injection compared with the pre-treatment score (P<0.001). However, the effect of IA LFJ corticosteroid injection was not significantly different among the three groups (P=0.889). The results demonstrated that facet joint-origin LBP was significantly reduced after IA LFJ corticosteroid injection, regardless of the severity of FJOA. The results of the current study indicated that IA LFJ corticosteroid injection is a beneficial clinical option for managing LBP caused by FJOA.

Transforaminal Epidural Injection of Local Anesthetic and Dorsal Root Ganglion Pulsed Radiofrequency Treatment in Lumbar Radicular Pain: A Randomized, Triple-Blind, Active-Control Trial

BACKGROUND

Lumbar radicular pain (LRP) results from inflammation and irritation of lumbar spinal nerves and the dorsal root ganglion (DRG).

METHODS

Our study is a prospective, triple-blind, randomized, activecontrol trial (CTRI/2016/02/006666) comparing transforaminal epidural local anesthetic (LA) injection and pulsed radiofrequency treatment of DRG in patients with chronic LRP. Patients with LRP after failed conservative management for >3 months received selective diagnostic nerve root block with 1 mL 2% lidocaine. Fifty patients showing positive responses were divided into groups of 25 each. The LA group received transforaminal epidural injection of 1 mL 0.5% bupivacaine. The lumbar pulsed radiofrequency (LPRF) group received transforaminal epidural injection of 1 mL 0.5% bupivacaine with 3 cycles of pulsed radiofrequency of the DRG for 180 seconds RESULTS: Both groups were compared by observing pain intensity on a 0- to 100-point VAS and improvement in functional status by the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI version 2.0) at 2 weeks and 1, 2, 3, and 6 months. All baseline variables were comparable between the 2 groups. Statistically significant reduction in both outcomes was seen in the LPRF group compared to the LA group from 2 weeks to 6 months. One hundred percent of patients in the LPRF group had a ≥20- point decrease in VAS and significant percentage reduction in ODI at all time intervals up to 6 months, whereas it was seen in 80% and 28% of patients in the LA group at 3 and 6 months, respectively. No complications were seen in any patients CONCLUSION: Pulsed radiofrequency of the DRG applied for longer duration results in long-term pain relief and improvement in the functional quality of life in patients with chronic LRP.

Nonsurgical treatments for patients with radicular pain from lumbosacral disc herniation

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Lumbosacral disc herniation (LDH) is one of the most frequent musculoskeletal diseases causative of sick leave in the workplace and morbidity in daily activities. Nonsurgical managements are considered as first line treatment before surgical treatment.

PURPOSE

This clinical practice guideline (CPG) is intended to provide physicians who treat patients diagnosed with LDH with a guideline supported by scientific evidence to assist in decision-making for appropriate and reasonable treatments.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

A systematic review.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Studies of human subjects written in Korean or English that met the following criteria were selected: patients aged ≥18 years, clinical presentation of low back and radicular leg pain, diagnosis of LDH on radiological evaluation including computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging.

OUTCOMES MEASURES

Pain and functional evaluation scales such as visual analogue scale, numeric rating scale, and Oswestry disability index METHODS: The MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, Cochrane Review, and KoreaMed databases were searched for articles regarding non-surgical treatments for LDH published up to July 2017. Of the studies fulfilling these criteria, those investigating clinical results after non-surgical treatment including physical and behavioral therapy, medication, and interventional treatment in terms of pain control and functional improvements were chosen for this study.

RESULTS

Nonsurgical treatments were determined to be clinically effective with regards to pain reduction and functional improvement in patients with LDH. Nevertheless, the evidence level was generally not evaluated as high degree, which might be attributed to the paucity of well-designed randomized controlled trials. Exercise and traction were strongly recommended despite moderate level of evidence. Epidural injection was strongly recommended with high degree of evidence and transforaminal approach was more strongly recommended than caudal approach.

CONCLUSIONS

This CPG provides new and updated evidence-based recommendations for treatment of the patients with LDH, which suggested that, despite an absence of high degrees of evidence level, non-surgical treatments were clinically effective.

Transforaminal epidural steroid injection combined with pulsed radio frequency on spinal nerve root for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation

Background

Lumbar disc herniation (LDH) is a common disease in clinical practice. The symptoms recur and are aggravated by time; severe pain and long-term movement disorder cause physiological and psychological problems that affect the quality of life of patients. Therefore, relieving the pain symptoms and promoting functional recovery are the primary goals that have gained increased attention.

Objective

To assess the efficacy of CT-guided transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) combined with pulsed radio frequency (PRF) on spinal nerve root for the treatment of LDH.

Study design

Retrospective comparative study.

Setting

Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University.

Methods

A total of 135 patients with LDH were selected from the Department of Pain Management in the Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University between January 2014 and December 2016. All patients were divided into three groups according to the order of entry (n=45): TFESI (group A); PRF on spinal nerve root (group B); and TFESI combined with PRF on spinal nerve root (group C). The visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), and global perceived effect (GPE) before treatment and at different time points after treatment were observed, and patients' satisfaction was assessed.

Results

At every point of observation, the VAS and ODI decreased significantly as compared to that before treatment in all groups (P<0.05). The VAS and ODI in group A at 3 and 6 months after treatment were significantly higher than that in the other two groups (P<0.05). At day 1, day 14, and 1 month after treatment, the VAS and ODI in group C were significantly lower than that in group B (P<0.05). The GPE in group C was high in the early days, while that at day 14 and 1 month after treatment was significantly higher than that in the other two groups (P<0.05); no significant difference was observed in GPE at 3 and 6 months after treatment between groups B and C (P>0.05).

Conclusion

TFESI combined with PRF for the treatment of LDH could effectively and rapidly relieve lumbago and radicular pain and achieve long-term remission. Although the method is widely applicable, the precise selection of patients is imperative.

Effectiveness and Safety of Acupotomy for Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Randomized, Assessor-Blinded, Controlled Pilot Study

Objective

Patients with lumbar disc herniation (LDH) suffer from pain, physical disabilities, and low quality of life. This study was designed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of acupotomy in patients with LDH.

Method

Fifty participants with LDH were recruited to this randomized, assessor-blinded, controlled study and randomly assigned to the acupotomy (n = 25) or manual acupuncture (n = 25) group. The acupotomy group received acupotomy four times in 2 weeks, while the manual acupuncture group received manual acupuncture six times in 2 weeks. The follow-up visit was planned in the 4th week (i.e., 2 weeks after the final intervention). The primary outcome was the change in the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at follow-up. The changes in the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Modified-Modified Schober Test (MMST), and EuroQol Five Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire were also evaluated. An intention-to-treat analysis was applied and adverse events were recorded.

Results

The acupotomy group showed significant changes in VAS, ODI, and EQ-5D after intervention. VAS and ODI in the 4th week were lower in the acupotomy than in the manual acupuncture group. The acupotomy group showed consistent changes in VAS and ODI in the 1st, 2nd, and 4th week. No serious adverse event was reported in the acupotomy group.

Conclusion

This study suggests greater therapeutic effects of acupotomy on relieving pain and improving the functional disability associated with LDH than those observed with manual acupuncture.

Effectiveness of pulsed radiofrequency treatment on cervical radicular pain: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Cervical radicular pain is a challenging medical problem in terms of therapeutic management. Recently, pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) stimulation on the dorsal root ganglion (DRG) has been used to control several types of chronic pain. However, its effect on cervical radicular pain is still not well studied. To conduct a meta-analysis of available clinical studies on PRF treatment in patients with cervical radicular pain induced by cervical spine disease that was not responsive to other conservative treatments.

METHODS

A comprehensive database search was conducted on PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and SCOPUS. We included studies published up to August 31, 2017, that fulfilled our inclusion and exclusion criteria. The pain degrees measured using visual analog scale (VAS) at pretreatment and after PRF on the DRG were collected for the meta-analysis. The Cochrane Collaboration's Handbook and Newcastle-Ottawa scale were used for the methodological quality assessments of included studies. The meta-analysis was performed using the Comprehensive Meta-analysis Version 2.

RESULTS

A total of 67 patients from one RCT study, 2 prospective observational studies, and one retrospective study were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled data of the 4 included studies showed that overall VAS after the PRF treatment was significantly reduced (P ≤ .001). In the subgroup analysis according to follow-up evaluation time points, the pain was significantly reduced at 2 weeks, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after the procedure (2 weeks: P = .02; 1, 3, and 6 months: P < .001).

CONCLUSION

According to the results of the meta-analysis, the use of PRF on the DRG is effective for alleviating cervical radicular pain, which was unresponsive to oral medications, physical therapy, or epidural steroid injection.

Spinal Cord Injury by Direct Damage During CT-Guided C7 Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injection

Cervical transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) under the guidance of computed tomography (CT) can offer great anatomical resolution and precise needle placement in the axial plane. However, some complications, including blood pressure surge, allergic reactions, vasovagal syncope, and cerebral infarct, have been reported after CT-guided cervical TFESI. We report the first case of iatrogenic spinal cord injury during a CT-guided cervical TFESI. A 67-year-old woman, upon receiving TFESI on Lt. C7, experienced an electrical shock-like sensation throughout the body. The patient complained of weakness in the left upper and lower extremities (manual muscle testing grade: 2-4) and neuropathic pain (numeric rating scale: 9) in the left upper and lower extremities. Cervical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) performed 9 days after TFESI showed a high T2 signal at the left side of the spinal cord from levels C5 to C7, and an electrophysiological study performed 14 days after TFESI revealed corresponding findings with cervical MRI. Three months after finishing treatment with a high dose of intravenous methylprednisolone, the patient's motor weakness improved, but it did not recover fully.

Pulsed radiofrequency in chronic pain

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The increasing number of publications on pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) treatment of chronic pain reflects the interest for this technique. We summarize the literature for PRF in five indications: radicular pain, trigeminal neuralgia (TN), occipital neuralgia, shoulder and knee pain.

RECENT FINDINGS

The efficacy and safety of PRF adjacent to the dorsal root ganglion was documented on cervical and on lumbar level.PRF has been used for the treatment of TN. The observed duration of effect is shorter than that of conventional radiofrequency, but no neurological complications are reported with PRF.PRF of the nervi occipitales is superior to steroid injections in occipital neuralgia.Several studies showed that PRF of the nervus suprascapularis may relief shoulder pain and can improve mobility of the shoulder joint.For the treatment of knee pain, different nerves have been targeted for PRF treatment.

SUMMARY

PRF treatment has progressively gained a place in the management of chronic pain syndromes. The concept is appealing because long-lasting effects are reported without complications. Future research is needed with high quality randomized controlled trials and identification of the optimal parameters of PRF in clinical practice.

Comparison of Intra-articular Thoracic Facet Joint Steroid Injection and Thoracic Medial Branch Block for the Management of Thoracic Facet Joint Pain

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective observational study.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to show the effect of intra-articular (IA) thoracic facet joint (TFJ) steroid injection for the management of TFJ pain, and to compare it with the effect of therapeutic thoracic medial branch block (MBB) with a local anesthetic and steroid.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Several studies have shown the effects of thoracic MBB with local anesthetics with or without steroids and radiofrequency neurotomy in managing TFJ pain, but thus far, the effectiveness of IA TFJ steroid injection has not been studied.

METHODS

Forty patients with TFJ pain were recruited and randomly assigned to one of two groups, the IA steroid injection and the MBB group, each with 20 patients. For IA TFJ steroid injection and therapeutic MBB, we injected 0.5 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine, mixed with 10 mg (0.25 mL) of dexamethasone. We assessed the severity of TFJ pain using a numeric rating scale (NRS) before treatment and at 1, 3, and 6 months after treatment.

RESULTS

Compared to the pretreatment NRS scores, the NRS scores at 1, 3, and 6 months after each treatment showed a significant decrease in patients in both the groups. Intergroup changes in the NRS scores were not significantly different over time. Six months after the treatment, 65% of the patients in the IA steroid injection group reported successful pain relief (pain relief ≥50%), and 40% of the patients in the MBB group showed successful pain relief.

CONCLUSION

In the present study, both IA TFJ steroid injection and therapeutic MBB significantly relieved TFJ pain. Their effects persisted for at least 6 months after the procedure. Thus, we think that both IA TFJ steroid injection and therapeutic thoracic MBB are useful treatment options for managing TFJ pain.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2.

Effect of Interlaminar Epidural Steroid Injection in Patients with Central Cervical Spinal Stenosis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of interlaminar epidural steroid injection (ESI) for management of central cervical spinal stenosis-induced posterior neck pain.

METHODS

This retrospective study recruited 45 patients with posterior neck pain caused by central cervical spinal stenosis. For the ESI procedure, a 21-gauge Touhy needle was inserted into the epidural space between C7 and T1, and 20 mg (40 mg/mL) of dexamethasone with 4 mL of normal saline was injected. The effect of the procedure was evaluated using a numerical rating scale at 1, 2, and 3 months after the procedure. Successful pain relief was defined as reduction in numerical rating scale score of ≥50% compared with before treatment. At 3 months after treatment, patient satisfaction levels were examined; patients who reported very good (score = 7) or good results (score = 6) were considered to be satisfied with the procedure.

RESULTS

Posterior neck pain was significantly reduced at follow-up evaluation 1, 2, and 3 months after ESI (P < 0.001, repeated measures 1-factor analysis). At 3 months after the procedure, 58% of the patients achieved a successful response (≥50% pain reduction), and 56% were satisfied with treatment results.

CONCLUSIONS

Cervical interlaminar ESI appears to be a good treatment method for managing chronic posterior neck pain induced by central cervical spinal stenosis, especially when pain is refractory to oral medication.

The effect of intra-articular stimulation by pulsed radiofrequency on chronic sacroiliac joint pain refractory to intra-articular corticosteroid injection: A retrospective study

We investigated the degree of pain reduction following intra-articular (IA) pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) stimulation of the sacroiliac joint (SIJ) in patients with chronic SIJ pain that had not responded to IA corticosteroid injection. Twenty patients were recruited. Clinical outcomes after applying PRF stimulation of the SIJ were evaluated by a numeric rating scale (NRS) and a 7-point Likert scale. The NRS scores significantly changed over time. The NRS scores at 1, 2, and 3 months after PRF were significantly lower than those before PRF. However, 4 of the 20 patients (20%) reported successful pain relief (pain relief of ≥ 50%) and were satisfied with the PRF stimulation at 3 months after treatment. IA PRF stimulation of the SIJ was not successful in most patients (80% of all patients). Based on our results, we cannot recommend this procedure to patients with chronic SIJ pain that was unresponsive to IA SIJ corticosteroid injection. Further studies on the effective mode of PRF stimulation and appropriate patient group, and studies on pain conditions that are most responsive to PRF are needed in the future.

Effects of pulsed radiofrequency on spasticity in patients with spinal cord injury: a report of two cases

Spasticity following spinal cord injury (SCI) results in functional deterioration and reduced quality of life. Herein, we report two SCI patients who presented with good response to pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) for the management of spasticity in the lower extremities. Patient 1 (a 47-year-old man) had complete thoracic cord injury and showed a phasic spasticity on the extensor of both knees (3-4 beats clonus per every 30 seconds) and tonic spasticity (Modified Ashworth Scale: 3) on both hip adductors. Patient 2 (a 64-year-old man) had incomplete cervical cord injury and showed a right ankle clonus (approximately 20 beats) when he walked. After the application of PRF to both L2 and L3 dorsal root ganglion (DRG) (patient 1) and right S1 DRG (patient 2) with 5 Hz and 5 ms pulsed width for 360 seconds at 45V under the C-arm guide, all spasticity disappeared or was reduced. Moreover, the effects of PRF were sustained for approximately 6 months with no side effects. We believe that PRF treatment can be useful for patients with spasticity after SCI.

Effect of bipolar pulsed radiofrequency on refractory chronic cervical radicular pain: A report of two cases

RATIONALE

Despite undergoing transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI), many patients complain of persisting cervical radicular pain. For the management of chronic cervical radicular pain, clinicians are widely applying pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) stimulation to dorsal root ganglions (DRGs). To enhance the effect of PRF stimulation, we conducted bipolar PRF stimulation in 2 patients with chronic cervical radicular pain that was refractory to monopolar PRF and repeated TFESIs.

PATIENT CONCERNS

Patients 1 and 2 presented with a numeric rating scale (NRS) score of 7 and 6 for chronic cervical radicular pain, respectively, despite undergoing monopolar PRF and 2 TFESIs.

DIAGNOSES

On cervical magnetic resonance imaging, foraminal stenosis at the right C6-7 and right central to right foraminal disc protrusion on C6-7 were observed in patients 1 and 2, respectively. Two patients showed a positive response on diagnostic right C7 selective nerve root block with 0.5 mL of 1% lidocaine.

INTERVENTIONS

Bipolar PRF stimulation was performed under C-arm fluoroscopy. Two parallel RF cannulas (less than 1 cm apart) were used for DRG stimulation. The PRF treatment was administered at 5 Hz and a 5-ms pulsed width for 360 seconds at 45 V with the constraint that the electrode tip temperature did not exceed 42°C.

OUTCOMES

At the 2-week and 1-month follow-up, after undergoing bipolar PRF, the pain of patient 1 was completely relieved, and at 2, 3, and 6 months, the pain was scored as NRS 2. In patient 2, at the 2-week follow-up after undergoing bipolar PRF, pain severity was reduced from NRS 6 to 2. The effect of bipolar PRF on patient 2 lasted for at least 6 months. No adverse effects were observed in either patient.

LESSONS

Application of bipolar PRF to DRGs seems to be an effective and safe technique for treating refractory chronic cervical radicular pain.

Comparison of intra-articular lumbar facet joint pulsed radiofrequency and intra-articular lumbar facet joint corticosteroid injection for management of lumbar facet joint pain: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to demonstrate the effect of intra-articular (IA) lumbar facet joint (LFJ) pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) for the management of LFJ pain, and to compare the effect of IA LFJ PRF to IA corticosteroid injection (ICI). Pathology in the LFJ is a common source of lower back pain (LBP). It is responsible for chronic LBP in approximately 15% to 45% of patients. It has been reported that PRF stimulation can effectively reduce refractory joint pain.

METHODS

Sixty patients with LFJ pain were recruited and randomly assigned to 1 of 2 groups: the IA PRF group and the ICI group. There were 30 patients in each group. At pretreatment, 2 weeks, 1, 3, and 6 months after treatment, we assessed the severity of LBP using a numeric rating scale (NRS).

RESULTS

Compared with the pretreatment NRS scores, patients in both groups showed a significant decrease in NRS scores at 2 weeks, and 1, 3, and 6 months after each treatment. Between groups, changes in the NRS scores were significantly different over time. At 2 weeks and 1 month after each procedure, the NRS score after ICI was significantly lower than that after the PRF stimulation. However, at 3 and 6 months after the procedures, the decrements of NRS scores were not significantly different between the 2 groups. Six months after treatment, about half of patients in both groups reported successful pain relief (pain relief of ≥50%).

CONCLUSION

In the current study, both IA PRF stimulation and ICI into the LFJ significantly relieved LFJ pain. Their effects persisted for at least 6 months after the procedure. Thus, IA PRF is a useful therapeutic option for the management of LFJ pain.

Comparison between bipolar pulsed radiofrequency and monopolar pulsed radiofrequency in chronic lumbosacral radicular pain: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Chronic lumbosacral radicular pain is a challenging medical problem with respect to therapeutic management. Many patients with lumbosacral radicular pain complain of persistent leg pain after transforaminal epidural steroid injection. Nowadays, pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) stimulation on the dorsal root ganglion (DRG) is widely used for controlling lumbosacral radicular pain.

METHODS

We evaluated the effect of bipolar PRF on the DRG for the management of lumbosacral radicular pain. In addition, we compared the effect of bipolar PRF to monopolar PRF. Fifty patients with chronic lumbosacral radicular pain were included in the study and randomly assigned to 1 of 2 groups, the bipolar or monopolar PRF group (n = 25 per group). Pain intensity was evaluated using a numeric rating scale (NRS) at pretreatment, and 1, 2, and 3 months after treatment.

RESULTS

When compared to the pretreatment NRS scores, patients in both groups showed a significant decrease in NRS scores at 1, 2, and 3 months after treatment. Reductions in the NRS scores over time were significantly larger in the bipolar PRF group. Three months after treatment, 19 patients (76.0%) in the bipolar PRF group and 12 patients (48.0%) in the monopolar PRF group reported successful pain relief (pain relief of ≥50%).

CONCLUSION

The use of bipolar PRF on the DRG can be an effective and safe interventional technique for chronic refractory lumbosacral radiculopathy, particularly in patients whose pain are refractory to epidural steroid injection or monopolar PRF stimulation.