Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35430676›Full record

ArticlePain and therapy2022

Radiofrequency Ablation of the Superior Cluneal Nerve: A Novel Minimally Invasive Approach Adopting Recent Anatomic and Neurosurgical Data.

O Visnjevac, M Pastrak, F Ma, T Visnjevac, A Abd-Elsayed

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pain and therapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06240000 (Comparison of the Effectiveness of Radiofrequency Ablation of the Superior Cluneal Nerve and Conventional Physical Therapy in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 36% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT06240000 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Comparison of the Effectiveness of Radiofrequency Ablation of the Superior Cluneal Nerve and Conventional Physical Therapy in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain

TypeinterventionalSponsorAnkara City Hospital BilkentRan2023 to 2024Enrolled25ConditionsNerve Entrapment Syndrome, Radiofrequency Ablation, Low Back PainArmsRadiofrequency ablation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

O VisnjevacFaculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
M PastrakSchool of Medicine, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
F MaBloor Pain Specialists, Toronto, ON, Canada.
T VisnjevacBloor Pain Specialists, Toronto, ON, Canada.
A Abd-ElsayedUniversity of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA. alaaawny@hotmail.com.
McMaster University · CAUniversity College Cork · IEUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

OBJECTIVES/

introductionSuperior cluneal neuralgia (SCN) is a distinct cause of lower back and/or leg pain related to pathology of the superior cluneal nerve (SCn). SCN has been termed pseudo-sciatica and is an overlooked differential diagnosis when patients are otherwise presenting with low back and/or radicular pain. Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is commonly used for denervation of the medial branches of the dorsal root for facet joint syndrome for sacroiliac joint; however, RFA has not been described to ablate the SCn for SCN. Herein, we present a novel interventional minimally invasive approach using RFA of the SCn for SCN in a series of 46 patients.

methodsInstitutional review board approved retrospective chart review was used to collect data for all SCn RFA cases from January 1, 2018, to February 8, 2021. Fluoroscopically guided SCn ablations were performed for patients with a positive "iliac crest point sign," reproductive of their back and leg pain during physical examination. Sensory stimulation was utilized to confirm RF cannula-probe placement adjacent to the SCn, and motor testing was used to confirm no distal motor response prior to monopolar RF ablation with a Halyard RF Generator (100 mm curved 22G 10 mm active tip RF cannulae). Charts were reviewed for time of analgesia follow-up, duration and degree of analgesia, improvements in patients' functional capacity, and changes in medication.

resultsData were reviewed for 51 patients who underwent Scn RFA, 5 of which were lost to follow-up. The remaining 46 patients consisted of 29 women and 17 men with a mean age of 59.4 years; 78.3% (n = 36) had ongoing relief at a mean of 92.1 days follow-up, ranging from 13 to 308 days, with a mean of 92.3% analgesia (SD 15.0%). At a mean of 111.2 days of follow-up, ranging from 42-201 days, 21.7% (n = 10) of patients reported that their pain had returned and had 95% analgesia during that time period (SD 6.7%); 41.3% (n = 19) reported improved activity/gait, 17.4% reported improved mood (n = 8), and 8.7% reported decreased medication use (n = 4). Five patients had minor complications including bruising (1), 2-3 days of soreness on site (2), myofascial pain (1), and quadratus lumborus muscle spasm relieved with trigger point injection (1).

conclusionsThis is the first report of both technique and outcomes for radiofrequency ablation of superior cluneal neuralgia. This series suggests that RFA of the SCn is a suitable intervention for the treatment of SCN; 21.7% of patients reported a mean of 95% analgesia for a mean duration of 111.2 days, and the remaining 78.3% of patients reported ongoing relief with a mean of 92.3% analgesia at last follow-up (mean 92.1 days). There were no serious adverse events.

Indexed as

Low back painRadiofrequency ablationSuperior cluneal nerve

Identifiers

PMID35430676
PMCPMC9098737
OpenAlexW4224142289

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.