ArticleHeliyon2022
Effect of radiofrequency denervation on pain severity among patients with cervical, thoracic or lumbar spinal pain: A clinical retrospective study.
Article in Heliyon, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of real-world, prospective outcomes in patients treated with cervical radiofrequency ablation for chronic pain (RAPID).Interventional pain medicine · 2025Article
- 7. Cervical facet pain: Degenerative alterations and whiplash-associated disorder.Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Low back pain is the leading cause of job-related disabilities. The zygapophyseal (facet) joint has been identified as a cause of spinal pain in 15%-45% of individuals. Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) to the facet joints of the lumbar, cervical and thoracic regions and discussion of the 2-year follow-up results will provide additional data and contribute to understanding the long-term effectiveness of RFA. Methods: Patients with cervical, thoracic or low back pain, not accompanied by radicular pain and without primary and/or metastatic disease in the spinal region during radiological evaluation were retrospectively analysed. A total of 1274 patients aged >18 years who had clinical follow-up for at least 1 year and had back pain for >6 months were included in the study. The RFA groups were compared within themselves before and after the application. Moreover, patients who received RFA were compared with those who did not receive RFA (controls). The visual analogue scale and quality-of-life scores of the patients were evaluated. Periodic clinical follow-ups revealed changes in neurological status. Results: Of the 774 patients who underwent RFA, 156, 184 and 434 patients had pain in the cervical, thoracic and lumbar and lumbosacral regions, respectively. The control groups consisted of 108, 122 and 270 patients, respectively. No significant difference in any of the baseline demographic variables was observed between the groups (p > 0.05). A significant improvement was found in both visual analogue scale and quality-of-life scores when compared before and after RFA application within the groups. In addition, a significant improvement was found in the RFA group compared with the control group. Conclusions: As far as we know, this is the first comparative study of RFA involving the cervical, thoracic and lumbar spinal regions. RFA made it possible to obtain satisfactory results in all three regions. With its increasing popularity and frequency of use, new indications for RFA may emerge.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.