Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39239503›Full record

ArticleInterventional pain medicine2024

Effectiveness comparison of genicular nerve ablation for knee osteoarthritic versus post-total knee arthroplasty pain.

Weibin Shi, To-Nhu Vu, Thiru Annaswamy, Hong Wu, Bryan Moore, Nicole Hatchard, Chad Mears, Allen R Kunselman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Interventional pain medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

8 authors.

Weibin ShiDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Penn State Health Milton S Hershey Medical Center / Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, USA.
To-Nhu VuDepartment of Anesthesiology & Perioperative Medicine, Penn State Health Milton S Hershey Medical Center / Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, USA.
Thiru AnnaswamyDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Penn State Health Milton S Hershey Medical Center / Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, USA.
Hong WuDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, RUSH University Medical College, Chicago, IL, USA.
Bryan MooreDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Penn State Health Milton S Hershey Medical Center / Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, USA.
Nicole HatchardDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Penn State Health Milton S Hershey Medical Center / Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, USA.
Chad MearsDepartment of Anesthesiology & Perioperative Medicine, Penn State Health Milton S Hershey Medical Center / Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, USA.
Allen R KunselmanDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Penn State Hershey College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Genicular nerve radiofrequency ablation (GNRFA) is a popular and effective procedure to treat arthritic knee pain. For refractory arthritic pain that fails conservative treatment, total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has been an excellent option. Unfortunately, 15-30% of people who undergo a TKA continue to experience pain and stiffness in the knee. The treatment options for post-TKA knee pain are limited. Pain providers have been trialing GNRFA on this pain condition. However, convincing evidence of its efficacy in treating post-TKA pain is still lacking. Methods: This is a retrospective study of 73 patients who had undergone genicular nerve RFA, 46 (63.01%) with osteoarthritic pain, and 27 (36.99%) with post-TKA pain. We compared the outcomes (pain relief, function, and complications) between these two groups at 3 months and 6 months after RFA. Results: Before RFA, there was no significant difference in initial pain and functional level between these two groups. After RFA, the two groups had comparable pain relief at 3 months (p = 0.68) and 6 months (p = 0.53), and similar functionality at 3 months (p = 0.36) and 6 months (p = 0.65).The overall success rate (≥50% pain relief after RFA) was 80.82%, 95% CI: 70.34%-88.22% (osteoarthritic group 80.43%, 95% CI: 66.83%-89.35%, post-TKA 81.48%, 95% CI: 63.30%-91.82%, P = 0.91) at 3-month follow-up and 56.16%, 95% CI: 44.76%-66.95% (osteoarthritic group 56.52%, 95% CI: 42.25%-69.79%, post-TKA 55.56%, 95% CI: 37.31%-72.41%, P = 0.94) at 6-month follow-up.There were no reported complications in either group. Conclusions: Genicular Nerve Radiofrequency Ablation (GNRFA) holds the potential to be equally effective for both post-TKA knee pain and osteoarthritic knee pain.

Indexed as

EfficacyKnee painOsteoarthritisPost-total knee arthroplastyRadiofrequency ablation

Identifiers

PMID39239503
PMCPMC11372902

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.