ArticleInterventional pain medicine2025
Evaluating prognostic block selection criteria in cervical medial branch radiofrequency neurotomy: A retrospective cohort study.
Article in Interventional pain medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The effectiveness of cervical medial branch radiofrequency ablation using a three-tined electrode: A real-world cross-sectional cohort study.Interventional pain medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Considerable variability exists in the literature record regarding patient selection criteria for cervical medial branch radiofrequency neurotomy (CMBRFN). Few prior studies have assessed the correlation between different prognostic block paradigms and treatment outcomes for this procedure. Objectives: Examine the association between various prognostic block selection criteria and CMBRFN success rates. Methods: Retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients from two Canadian musculoskeletal pain management clinics who underwent first-time CMBRFN between 2016 and 2022 with a three-tined cannula utilizing a perpendicular approach. Patients were categorized according to prognostic block paradigms (single vs. dual), block type (medial branch block [MBB] vs. intraarticular block [IAB]), and percentage pain relief after blocks. Six block criteria were established: 1 = MBB/MBB≥80 %; 2 = MBB/MBB 50-79 %; 3 = IAB/MBB≥80 %; 4 = IAB/MBB 50-79 %; 5 = MBB≥80 %; 6 = MBB 50-79 %. Treatment success was evaluated at 3 months post-CMBRFN as the proportion of participants with (1) ≥50 % NRS pain score reduction (the primary outcome) and (2) ≥17-point score decrease (the minimal clinically important difference [MCID]) on the Pain Disability Quality-of-Life Questionnaire - Spine (PDQQ-S). Logistic regression analyses were used to explore associations between block criteria and CMBRFN treatment success. Results: A total of 171 consecutive patients (58.5 % female; 58.0 ± 12.1 years of age; BMI 28.7 ± 6.0 kg/m Conclusion: Over 60 % of patients who underwent CMBRFN reported clinically significant magnitudes of improvement in pain and disability at three months post-CMBRFN, regardless of prognostic block selection criteria. These findings suggest that multiple block strategies might be employed to determine eligibility for CMBRFN. Larger, prospective studies including long-term outcome assessments are needed to further evaluate these findings.
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.