Effectiveness of the Thermal Genicular Nerve Radiofrequency Ablation Therapy Under Fluoroscopy in Patients with Non-operative Advanced Stage Knee Osteoarthritis: 1-Year Follow-Up Results

Kaya, Oğuz; Senel, Ahmet Can; Batur, Ömer Cihan; Gönder, Nevzat; Ergen, Emre; Peker, Barış

doi:10.1007/s43465-022-00642-3

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In 2022, Kaya et al . reported the 1-year results of the impact of thermal genicular nerve RF on pain and functional results in individuals with advanced knee OA ( 57 ). Forty-nine knees (35 patients) that had undergone thermal RF of the superior medial, superior lateral, and inferior medial branches of the genicular nerve under fluoroscopic guidance were analysed.…”

Section: Lower Limb Rf Treatmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nonsurgical thermal genicular nerve RF therapy of knee OA rendered significant results in terms of pain and functionality, with no significant systemic or local complications. According to the authors, the procedure could be considered an alternative to other methods when managing advanced knee OA ( 57 ). Figure 3 shows a case of fluoroscopically guided genicular nerve RF for treating chronic knee pain due to OA.…”

Section: Lower Limb Rf Treatmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Upper limb and lower limb radiofrequency treatments in orthopaedics

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Radiofrequency (RF) is a minimally invasive technique for disrupting or altering nociceptive pathways to treat musculoskeletal neuropathic and nociplastic pain. RF has been employed to treat painful shoulder, lateral epicondylitis, knee and hip osteoarthritis, chronic knee pain, Perthes disease, greater trochanteric pain syndrome, plantar fasciitis, and painful stump neuromas; it has also been employed before and after painful total knee arthroplasty and after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. The benefits of RF include the following:it is safer than surgery; there is no need for general anaesthesia, thereby reducing adverse effects; it alleviates pain for a minimum of 3–4 months; it can be repeatable if necessary; and it improves joint function and minimizes the need for oral pain medication. RF is contraindicated for pregnant women; unstable joints (hip, knee, and shoulder); uncontrolled diabetes mellitus; presence of an implanted defibrillator; and chronic joint infection (hip, knee, and shoulder). Although adverse events from RF are unusual, potential complications can include infection, bleeding, numbness or dysesthesia, increased pain at the procedural site, deafferentation effect, and Charcot joint neuropathy. Although there is a risk of damaging non-targeted neural tissue and other structures, this can be mitigated by performing the technique under imaging guidance (fluoroscopy, ultrasonography, and computed tomography). RF appears to be a valuable technique for alleviating chronic pain syndromes; however, firm proof of the technique’s efficacy is still required. RF is a promising technique for managing chronic musculoskeletal of the limbs pain, particularly when other techniques are futile or not possible.

show abstract

Section: Lower Limb Rf Treatmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Lower Limb Rf Treatmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Upper limb and lower limb radiofrequency treatments in orthopaedics

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It significantly impairs the ADL along with working abilities, leading to a considerable socioeconomic burden worldwide [2]. Conventional treatment modalities for the management of knee OA involve the use of non-pharmacological approaches such as physiotherapy, activity modification and weight management; pharmacological agents such as oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and opioids, and intra-articular (IA) injection of hyaluronic acid (viscosupplementation) (HA) and corticosteroids; nutraceuticals such as glucosamine, chondroitin sulfate, and undenatured type II collagen; minimally invasive procedures such as genicular nerve radiofrequency ablation; and surgical inferences, in progressive stages or after the traditional therapies have been ineffective [1][2][3]. These abovementioned treatment options have drawbacks and side effects, persistently aiming to decrease pain rather than targeting the underlying etiology [1][2][3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Autologous Protein Solution (APS) and Osteoarthritis of the Knee: A Scoping Review of Current Clinical Evidence

Gupta

2024

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Knees are the most regularly affected weight-bearing joints in osteoarthritis (OA), impacting millions of individuals across the globe. The incidence of knee OA will further rise with increasing rates of obesity and lifespan, resulting in a significant increase in the worldwide socioeconomic burden. Conventional therapies used to manage the symptoms associated with knee OA have limitations. Lately, there has been an increased interest in the use of autologous peripheral blood-derived orthobiologics (APBO), including autologous protein solution (APS), for the management of knee OA. Here, the primary objective is to summarize the outcomes of clinical studies involving APS for the treatment of knee OA. Several databases (Embase, Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science) were searched using terms for the intervention “APS” and treatment “knee OA” for articles published in English until January 21, 2024. All clinical studies using APS as an intervention for the treatment of knee OA were included. Studies not utilizing APS alone or not aiming at the management of knee OA were excluded. Six clinical studies that met our predefined search terms and inclusion and exclusion criteria were included in this study. The results demonstrated that the intra-articular administration of APS is safe and efficacious in reducing pain and/or improving function in patients suffering from knee OA. However, more multicenter, randomized controlled trials involving active comparators, with adequate power and long-term follow-up along with post-market real-world studies in clinical practice are required to further assess the efficacy of APS and justify its regular clinical use for the management of knee OA.

show abstract

“…Its aetiology comprises of inflammation of synovial tissue and deterioration of articular cartilage, resulting in pain, diminished function and affected overall quality of life (QoL) [2]. Knee OA is conservatively managed via non-pharmacological modalities such as weight reduction, activity alteration, and physical therapy; pharmacological substances such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opioids, and intraarticular administration of corticosteroids and viscosupplementation; minimally invasive procedures such as radiofrequency ablation of genicular nerve and peripheral nerve stimulators; and surgical interventions, in advanced stages or after conventional therapies have been unproductive [1][2][3]. These above-mentioned treatment modalities have shortcomings and side effects, constantly intending to decrease pain instead of targeting the causal pathophysiology [1][2][3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Autologous Conditioned Plasma (ACP) and Osteoarthritis of the Knee: A Review of Current Clinical Evidence

Gupta,

Jain

2024

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The primary objective of this study is to record the clinical outcomes of autologous conditioned plasma (ACP) for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA) based on published literature. Multiple databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Scopus) were searched using terms for “knee OA” and the intervention “ACP” for articles published in English to January 4, 2024. All clinical studies using ACP for knee OA were included. Studies not utilizing ACP alone, i.e. used as an adjunct with other modalities or not focusing on the management of knee OA, were excluded. Five studies, three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and two real-world post-market studies conducted in a clinical practice met the inclusion/exclusion criteria and were included in this study. All studies demonstrated statistically significant improvements in various patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), however the studies performed in the clinical practice reported non-accomplishment of minimally clinically important difference (MCID). The results demonstrated the potential of ACP for management of knee OA, however the MCID was not achieved in real-world clinical settings. Thus, more adequately powered RCTs with longer follow-up as well as real-world post-market studies are warranted to establish long-term efficacy and justify routine clinical use, respectively, of ACP in patients suffering with knee OA.

show abstract

Effectiveness of the Thermal Genicular Nerve Radiofrequency Ablation Therapy Under Fluoroscopy in Patients with Non-operative Advanced Stage Knee Osteoarthritis: 1-Year Follow-Up Results

Cited by 7 publications

References 25 publications

Upper limb and lower limb radiofrequency treatments in orthopaedics

Upper limb and lower limb radiofrequency treatments in orthopaedics

Autologous Protein Solution (APS) and Osteoarthritis of the Knee: A Scoping Review of Current Clinical Evidence

Autologous Conditioned Plasma (ACP) and Osteoarthritis of the Knee: A Review of Current Clinical Evidence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About