GuidelineSchmerz (Berlin, Germany)2026
[Radiofrequency denervation of the spine and the sacroiliac joint : A systematic literature search according to GRADE with new German S3 guideline].
Guideline in Schmerz (Berlin, Germany), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis article summarizes the results of the German guideline on radiofrequency denervation of the facet joints and the sacroiliac joint. Evidence on the indications, test blocks and technical parameters are presented.
objectiveThe aim is to avoid overtreatment and undertreatment, which is also of socioeconomic importance. MATERIAL AND
methodA systematic evaluation of the literature was carried out according to the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) approach. A multidisciplinary guideline group has developed recommendations and statements.
resultsStatements and recommendations were given for 20 key questions. There was an 87.5% consensus for 1 recommendation and 100% consensus for all other recommendations and statements. The guideline was approved by all scientific medical societies involved. Specific questions included the value of the medical history, examination and imaging, the need for conservative treatment prior to an intervention, the importance of test blocks (medial branch block and lateral branch block), choice of imaging for denervation, choice of trajectory, the possibility to influence the size of the lesion, stimulation, the possibility of revision, sedation and decision support for patients with anticoagulants, metal implants and pacemakers and advice on how to avoid complications.
conclusionSelected patients can benefit from well-performed radiofrequency denervation. The guideline recommendations are based on very low to moderate quality of evidence.
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.