ArticleInterventional pain medicine2025
What is the optimal block selection paradigm for predicting a successful treatment outcome following sacral lateral branch radiofrequency neurotomy? A real-world 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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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: Outcomes following sacral lateral branch radiofrequency neurotomy (SLBRFN) likely depend on patient selection criteria; however, commonly used criteria vary considerably. Refinement of selection criteria for SLBRFN may improve treatment outcomes. This study investigated common prognostic block-based selection criteria and treatment success following SLBRFN. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, consecutive patients from two Canadian musculoskeletal pain management clinics who underwent SLBRFN over a 6-year period (2016-2022) were identified by electronic medical record. Patients were categorized according to several prognostic block paradigms based on number of blocks (single vs. dual), block type (lateral branch block [LBB] vs. intra-articular block [IAB]), and subsequent percentage of pain relief. Six block criteria were established: 1 = LBB/LBB≥80 %; 2 = IAB/LBB≥80 %; 3 = LBB/LBB 50-79 %; 4 = IAB/LBB 50-79 %; 5 = LBB≥80 %; 6 = LBB 50-79 %. Treatment success was assessed at three months post-SLBRFN using two criteria: (1) the primary study outcome of ≥50 % numerical rating scale (NRS) pain reduction and (2) a secondary outcome of Pain Disability Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (PDQQ) score improvement by the minimal clinically important difference (MCID). Logistic regression analyses evaluated the association between block criteria and treatment success following SLBRFN. Results: 281 consecutive patients (75.1 % female, 61.8 ± 14.2 years of age, BMI 29.4 ± 6.6 kg/m Conclusion: Nearly 50 % of patients who underwent SLBRFN reported clinically significant improvement in pain and disability at three months post-procedure, regardless of prognostic block selection criteria. These results suggest that multiple block strategies may determine eligibility for SLBRFN.
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.