ReviewJournal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma2025
Outcome of cryoneurolysis treatment in knee osteoarthritis: A systematic review.
Review in Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma, 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.
- Rates of knee arthroplasty after genicular nerve ablation: A retrospective study utilizing a large national database.Interventional pain medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To determine the use of Cryoneurolysis for pain reduction, improvement of physical function and quality of life in knee osteoarthritis (KOA), and the safety profile from cryoneurolysis treatment. Method: This systematic review, conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines and registered under PROSPERO ID: CRD42024581457, evaluated the effectiveness, safety, and therapeutic outcomes of cryoneurolysis for KOA from inception to 2 October 2024. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, and CINHAL was conducted. The qualities and risk of potential bias of the studies were appraised using the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (NIH) Study Quality Assessment tools. Results: Five studies (two randomized controlled trials and three non-randomized studies) meet the inclusion criteria. These studies (n = 1064 patients) were found to be of fair to good quality. Findings revealed that cryoneurolysis significantly improved pain relief, functional outcomes (measured by WOMAC and KOOS), and quality of life, with effects lasting up to 6 months. The procedure was well-tolerated overall, with only mild adverse effects reported. However, heterogeneity in study designs, nerve targets, and outcome measures in these five included studies limited the feasibility of meta-analysis, indicating the need for future research on standardizing cryoneurolysis protocols, exploring image-guided techniques, and identifying patient subgroups most likely to benefit. Conclusion: There are fair to good quality of evidence to suggest cryoneurolysis as a safe and effective treatment for KOA, offering a valuable addition to the current therapeutic arsenal.
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.