Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT 84108, United States.
University of California Los Angeles School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA 90095, United States.
Pain Med. 2023 Dec 1;24(12):1318-1331. doi: 10.1093/pm/pnad107.
Lumbar medial branch radiofrequency ablation (LRFA) and intraarticular facet steroid injections (FJI) are commonly performed for recalcitrant facet joint-mediated pain. However, no study has compared clinical outcomes of the two treatments in patients selected using dual medial branch blocks (MBBs) with an 80% relief threshold.
Compare the effectiveness of cooled LRFA (C-LRFA) to FIJ as assessed by pain and functional improvements.
Prospective randomized comparative trial.
Patients with dual MBB-confirmed facet joint-mediated pain were randomized to receive C-LRFA or FIJ. Outcomes were assessed at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. The primary outcome was ≥50% improvement in numerical pain rating scale (NPRS) score at 3 months. Secondary outcomes included ≥30% Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) improvement and Patient Global Impression of Chance (PGIC) ≥6 points, among others. Data were analyzed using contingency tables and mixed-effects logistic regression models.
Of 1128 patients screened, 32 met eligibility criteria, were randomized, and received their allocated study treatment. In total, 20 (62.5%) and 12 (37.5%) participants received C-LRFA and FIJ, respectively. In the C-LRFA group, 70% (95% CI 48-85), 55% (95% CI 34-74), and 45% (95% CI 26-66) of participants met the NPRS responder definition, compared to 25% (95%CI 9-53), 25% (95% CI 9-53), and 17% (95% CI 5-45) in the FJI group at 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively (P = .014 at 3 months). The PGIC responder proportion was higher in the C-LRFA compared to FJI group at 3 and 6 months (P < .05).
C-LRFA demonstrated superior success rates compared to FJI across pain and functional outcome domains.
ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03614793); August 3, 2018.
腰椎内侧支射频消融术(LRFA)和关节内关节突类固醇注射(FJI)常用于治疗顽固性关节突关节介导的疼痛。然而,尚无研究比较使用 80%缓解阈值的双重内侧支阻滞(MBB)选择的患者中这两种治疗方法的临床效果。
比较冷却 LRFA(C-LRFA)与 FJI 的疗效,以疼痛和功能改善为评估标准。
前瞻性随机对照试验。
对双侧 MBB 确认的关节突关节介导性疼痛患者进行随机分组,接受 C-LRFA 或 FJI 治疗。在 1、3、6 和 12 个月时评估结果。主要结果是 3 个月时数字疼痛评分量表(NPRS)评分改善≥50%。次要结果包括 Oswestry 残疾指数(ODI)改善≥30%和患者总体印象变化(PGIC)≥6 分等。使用列联表和混合效应逻辑回归模型进行数据分析。
在筛查的 1128 名患者中,有 32 名符合入选标准,并随机分组接受了分配的研究治疗。共有 20 名(62.5%)和 12 名(37.5%)患者分别接受了 C-LRFA 和 FJI 治疗。在 C-LRFA 组中,70%(95%CI 48-85)、55%(95%CI 34-74)和 45%(95%CI 26-66)的患者在 3、6 和 12 个月时达到 NPRS 应答定义,而 FJI 组分别为 25%(95%CI 9-53)、25%(95%CI 9-53)和 17%(95%CI 5-45)(P=0.014,3 个月时)。在 3 和 6 个月时,C-LRFA 组的 PGIC 应答比例高于 FJI 组(P<0.05)。
与 FJI 相比,C-LRFA 在疼痛和功能结果领域显示出更高的成功率。
ClinicalTrials.gov(NCT03614793);2018 年 8 月 3 日。