Radiofrequency lesioning of dorsal root ganglia for chronic lumbosacral radicular pain: a randomised, double-lind, controlled trial

Chapter 4 European guidelines for the management of chronic nonspecific low back pain

“…Treatment was "successful" in seven of 44 patients (16%) who received the radiofrequency lesion compared with nine (25%) of 36 who received control treatment (difference p=0.43) (Geurts et al 2003).…”

Pulsed radiofrequency for chronic pain

“…However, the introduction of the 22-gauge RF cannula in 1981 allowed clinicians to administer CRF in precise anatomical locations and to control lesion size [2]. Since that time, CRF has been used to treat a host of painful conditions ranging from lumbar radicular pain [3] to intercostal neuralgia [4] and cervicogenic headaches [5]. Unfortunately, a significant hindrance to the greater acceptance of CRF has been the risk of motor deficits and deafferentation syndrome.…”

The role of radiofrequency in the treatment of mechanical pain of spinal origin

“…On the one hand, Leclaire et al reported that the procedure is effective in terms of pain improvement only in the short term (4 weeks after the procedure) and the improvement failed to last even beyond 12 weeks [8]. Other studies supported these data, including one recently published in the Lancet [1,6,8]. On the other hand, other authors showed long-term improvement in pain even for years after the procedure [4,17,19,22].…”

“…The principle is production of heat in order to damage some or all nerve fibers in the target nervous structure (in the case of "conventional" RF) or application of an electromagnetic field to the nervous structure (in the case of pulsed RF), with the ultimate aim of blocking transmission of pain stimuli from peripheral receptors to the central pain structures. In recent years, some publications have reported contradictory results following RF treatment of back pain [1,4,6,8,17,19,22]. On the one hand, Leclaire et al reported that the procedure is effective in terms of pain improvement only in the short term (4 weeks after the procedure) and the improvement failed to last even beyond 12 weeks [8].…”