ArticleCureus2024
A Comparison Between the Efficacy of Trigeminal Ganglion Radiofrequency Thermocoagulation and Ultrasound-Guided Maxillary-Mandibular Nerve Pulsed Radiofrequency in the Treatment of Trigeminal Neuralgia: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Advanced, pharmacological and complementary interventions for chronic or recurrent orofacial pain conditions: a systematic evidence map with selective meta-analyses.The journal of headache and pain · 2026Pooled it
- Comparison of Gasserian ganglion conventional radiofrequency ablation and peripheral nerve pulsed radiofrequency in trigeminal neuralgia: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of oral & facial pain and headache · 2026Trial
- Peripheral Pulsed Radiofrequency for Trigeminal Neuralgia: Early Efficacy with Limited Durability in a Real-World Cohort.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Anatomical Considerations in the Twin Block Technique for the Treatment of Masticatory Myofascial Pain: An Anatomical Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objective Trigeminal neuralgia (TN) is a debilitating disorder characterized by acute episodic attacks of pain that significantly impair patients' quality of life and overall functioning. Initial therapeutic strategies to treat this condition include pharmacological options, particularly carbamazepine. In cases with resistance to dose escalation and polypharmacy, interventional procedures may be warranted. The primary aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of trigeminal ganglion (TG) radiofrequency thermocoagulation (RFT) and ultrasound (US)-guided maxillary/mandibular (max/mand) nerve pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) for treating TN, based on the findings at six months post-treatment. The secondary aims were to assess the impact of these interventions on drug consumption and interventional safety based on adverse events. Methods This prospective, randomized, single-blind study was conducted at a single pain clinic. Forty-four patients were randomized into two groups. Group RFT received TG RFT at 60 °C, 65 °C, and 70 °C for 60 seconds each, whereas Group PRF received max/mand PRF for 240 seconds. Pain relief was assessed by using the numeric rating scale (NRS) and intervention effectiveness on medication consumption was evaluated by using the Medication Quantification Scale III (MQS III). The rates of intervention-related adverse events were also compared. Results Both RFT and PRF significantly alleviated pain at one and six months post-treatment compared to baseline (p<0.05). No statistical differences were found in the NRS and MQS III scores between the groups. At six months, 77.3% of RFT patients and 63.9% of PRF patients experienced at least 50% pain relief, with no statistically significant difference. Hypoesthesia occurred in two RFT patients, and masseter weakness was observed in one patient, while no adverse events were reported in the PRF group. Conclusions TG RFT and max/mand PRF are effective treatments for TN. US-guided max/mand PRF, which avoids RFT-associated complications and radiation exposure, may be the superior and preferable option. In this study, the potential space between the coronoid process and maxilla was used to access the maxillary nerve during the maxillary block and PRF procedures, in contrast to the classical approach through the mandibular notch. Further large-scale randomized controlled trials are required to gain deeper insights into the topic.
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.