Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38388017›Full record

Trial reportRegional anesthesia and pain medicine2025

Cooled versus conventional radiofrequency treatment of the genicular nerves for chronic knee pain: 12-month and cost-effectiveness results from the multicenter COCOGEN trial.

Amy Belba, Thibaut Vanneste, Jan Willem Kallewaard, Sander Mj van Kuijk, Marloes Gelissen, Peter Emans, Johan Bellemans, Kristof Smeets, Koen Van Boxem, Micha Sommer and 2 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Regional anesthesia and pain medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03865849 (Comparison of Cooled Versus Conventional Radiofrequency Treatment of the Genicular Nerves for Chronic Knee 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
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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.

NCT03865849 nacompletednot on this map

Comparison of Cooled Versus Conventional Radiofrequency Treatment of the Genicular Nerves for Chronic Knee Pain: a Multicentre Randomised Controlled Non-inferiority Pilot Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorZiekenhuis Oost-LimburgRan2020 to 2021Enrolled49ConditionsKnee OsteoarthritisArmsCooled radiofrequent treatment, Conventional radiofrequent treatment
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Cooled radiofrequency ablation for patients with chronic postsurgical pain after total knee arthroplasty: Pilot clinical trial.Asia-Pacific journal of sports medicine, arthroscopy, rehabilitation and technology · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 9. Chronic knee pain.Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain · 2025
    Review
  6. Review
  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

12 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Amy BelbaAnesthesiology, Intensive Care Medicine, Emergency Medicine and Multidisciplinary Pain Center, Ziekenhuis Oost-Limburg, Genk, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-9422-8940
Thibaut VannesteAnesthesiology, Intensive Care Medicine, Emergency Medicine and Multidisciplinary Pain Center, Ziekenhuis Oost-Limburg, Genk, Belgium Thibaut.Vanneste@zol.be.ORCID 0000-0002-1920-8085
Jan Willem KallewaardAnesthesiology, Rijnstate Hospital, Arnhem, The Netherlands.
Sander Mj van KuijkClinical Epidemiology & Medical Technology Assessment, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Marloes GelissenAnesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Peter EmansOrthopaedic Surgery, Joint Preserving Clinic, CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Johan BellemansFaculty of Medicine and Life Sciences, Hasselt University, Hasselt, Belgium.
Kristof SmeetsDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciences and Physiotherapy, BIOMED REVAL Rehabilitation Research Institute, Hasselt University, Hasselt, Belgium.
Koen Van BoxemAnesthesiology, Intensive Care Medicine, Emergency Medicine and Multidisciplinary Pain Center, Ziekenhuis Oost-Limburg, Genk, Belgium.
Micha SommerAnesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Merel KimmanClinical Epidemiology & Medical Technology Assessment, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Jan Van ZundertAnesthesiology, Intensive Care Medicine, Emergency Medicine and Multidisciplinary Pain Center, Ziekenhuis Oost-Limburg, Genk, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-5389-2036
Maastricht University Medical Centre · NLZiekenhuis Oost-Limburg · BEAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NLAZ Sint-Blasius · BEHasselt University · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRadiofrequency (RF) treatment of the genicular nerves reduces chronic knee pain in patients with osteoarthritis (OA) or persistent postsurgical pain (PPSP) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The objective of this study is to compare long-term outcomes of cooled and conventional RF and perform an economic evaluation.

methodsThe COCOGEN trial is a double-blinded, non-inferiority, pilot, randomized controlled trial that compared the effects up to 12 months of cooled and conventional RF in patients with chronic knee pain suffering from OA or PPSP after TKA following a 1:1 randomization rate. Outcomes were knee pain, functionality, quality of life, emotional health, medication use, and adverse events. A trial-based economic evaluation was performed with a 12-month societal perspective. Here, the primary outcome was the incremental costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY).

results41 of the 49 included patients completed the 12-month follow-up. One patient in the PPSP cooled RF group had substantial missing data at 12-month follow-up. The proportion of patients with ≥50% pain reduction at 12 months was 22.2% (4/18) in patients treated with conventional RF versus 22.7% (5/22) in patients treated with cooled RF (p>0.05). There was a statistically significant difference in the mean absolute numerical rating scale at 12 months after cooled RF and conventional RF in patients with PPSP (p=0.02). Differences between other outcomes were not statistically significant. The health economic analysis indicated that cooled RF resulted in lower costs and improved QALYs compared with conventional RF in PPSP but not in OA. There were no serious adverse events.

conclusionsBoth RF treatments demonstrated in approximately 22% of patients a ≥50% pain reduction at 12 months. In patients with PPSP, contrary to OA, cooled RF seems to be more effective than conventional RF. Additionally, cooled RF has in patients with PPSP, as opposed to OA, greater effectiveness at lower costs compared with conventional RF. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03865849.

Indexed as

Chronic PainCost-Benefit AnalysisOsteoarthritis, KneeAgedArthralgiaArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansKnee JointMaleMiddle AgedPain MeasurementPilot ProjectsPostoperative PainQuality-Adjusted Life YearsanalgesiaCHRONIC PAINPain, PostoperativeTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID38388017
PMCPMC13045507
OpenAlexW4394766348

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.