Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38580339›Full record

Trial reportRegional anesthesia and pain medicine2025

Fluoroscopy-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound neurotomy of the lumbar zygapophyseal joints: a prospective, open-label study.

Michael Gofeld, Kevin J Smith, Anuj Bhatia, Vladimir Djuric, Suzanne Leblang, Niv Rebhun, Ron Aginsky, Eric Miller, Brian Skoglind, Arik Hananel

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readClinical TrialMulticenter 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 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT04129034 naunknown statusnot on this map

Safety and Initial Feasibility of Using the Neurolyser XR Device for the Treatment of Axial Chronic Low Back Pain

TypeinterventionalSponsorFUSMobile Inc.Ran2019 to 2023Enrolled30ConditionsFacet Syndrome of Lumbar SpineArmsNeurolyser XR
NCT07647757 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Safety and Efficacy of Using the Neurolyser XR Device for the Treatment of Sacroiliac Joint Related Low Back Pain

TypeinterventionalSponsorFederico II UniversityRan2026 to 2027Enrolled30ConditionsSacroiliitis, Low Back PainArmsPatients treated with high intensity focused ultrasound
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Michael GofeldUnika Medical Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada mikegofeld@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0001-7372-4171
Kevin J SmithUnika Medical Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Anuj BhatiaAnesthesia and Pain Management, University of Toronto and University Health Network - Toronto Western Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-6292-8654
Vladimir DjuricMcMaster University Medical Centre, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Suzanne LeblangFocused Ultrasound Foundation, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA.
Niv RebhunFUSMobile, Alpharetta, Georgia, USA.
Ron AginskyFUSMobile LTD, Haifa, Israel.
Eric MillerFUSMobile, Alpharetta, Georgia, USA.
Brian SkoglindFUSMobile, Alpharetta, Georgia, USA.
Arik HananelFUSMobile, Alpharetta, Georgia, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe objective of this study is to investigate safety and effectiveness of a fluoroscopy-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) system for thermal ablation of the lumbar medial branch nerves.

methodsThis dual center prospective cohort study enrolled 30 participants with lumbar zygapophyseal joint syndrome. Each participant previously had a positive response to either a single diagnostic analgesic block or radiofrequency ablation (RFA). The primary effectiveness outcome was individual responder rate, defined as a reduction of two points or more on the pain intensity numerical rating scale without an increase in opioid intake, or a reduction in opioid intake without an increase in pain at 6 months after the intervention. The primary safety outcome was procedure-related or device-related adverse events (AEs). Secondary outcome variables included MRI evidence of tissue ablation, Oswestry Disability Index, 12-Item Short Form Health Survey, Brief Pain Inventory, and Patient Global Impression of Change.

resultsThe individual responder rate was 89.7% at 2 days, 89.7% at 7 days, 72.4% at 14 days, 82.1% at 30 days, 59.3% at 90 days and 82.6% at 180 days. The average Numeric Rating Scale for pain severity decreased from 7.1 at baseline to 3.0 (N=29) after 2 days, 3.0 (N=29) after 7 days, 3.1 (N=29) after 14 days, 3.2 (N=28) after 30 days, 4.3 (N=27) after 90 days, and 3.3 (N=23) after 180 days. All participants tolerated the procedure well with no significant side effects or complications.

conclusionsFluoroscopy-guided HIFU neurotomy achieved clinical responses comparable with RFA, and there were no significant device-related or procedure-related AEs. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04129034.

Indexed as

High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound AblationLow Back PainLumbar VertebraeZygapophyseal JointAdultAgedFemaleFluoroscopyHumansMaleMiddle AgedPain MeasurementProspective StudiesTreatment OutcomeUltrasonography, InterventionalBack PainPain ManagementPain MeasurementTECHNOLOGYTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID38580339
PMCPMC12322410

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.