ReviewCurrent pain and headache reports2024
Mitigating Factors in L4 and L5 Medial Branch Motor Stimulation During Radiofrequency Ablation.
Review in Current pain and headache reports, 2024. 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
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
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewRadiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a minimally invasive procedure for facet joint pain. The targets for the procedure are the medial branches of the dorsal spinal nerves which innervate the facet joints. Before RFA, patients undergo diagnostic meal branch blocks to ensure appropriate pain relief and confirm the utility of proceeding to RFA. The success of RFA relies heavily on procedural technique and accurate placement near the medial branch. RECENT
findingsMotor testing is utilized in the lumbar region to assess the response of the multifidus and ensure proper placement of the RFA probe to prevent inadvertent damage to surrounding spinal anatomy. However, relying on motor responses in this area presents challenges given the frequency of lack of muscle twitching. Factors contributing to limited muscle twitch responses include muscle atrophy, excessive lordosis, facet arthropathy, local anesthetic use before ablation, and previous surgical neurotomy. These complexities highlight the challenges in ensuring precise motor stimulation during RFA. Despite these obstacles, accurate anatomical placement remains crucial. For RFA cases that prove challenging, relying on anatomical placement can be adequate to proceed with the procedure. Bridging knowledge gaps is vital for standardized practices and safer procedures. Further research is necessary to refine techniques, understand patient-specific factors, and enhance the efficacy of RFA in managing chronic lumbar facet joint pain.
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.