ReviewCurrent pain and headache reports2025
Lumbar Radiofrequency Ablation (LRFA)- Myths and Facts: A Narrative Review of the Literature.
Review in Current pain and headache reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cooled Radiofrequency Ablation of the Lateral Femoral Cutaneous Nerve for Chronic Refractory Meralgia Paresthetica.Current pain and headache reports · 2025Review
- Evidence of Multifidus Changes Post-Lumbar Radiofrequency Ablation: A Narrative Literature 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewLumbar radiofrequency ablation (LRFA) is an interventional procedure that utilizes thermal energy to selectively ablate the lumbar medial branch nerves (LMBN) to provide relief from facet-mediated chronic axial low back pain. While LRFA is widely performed, considerable variability exists in its technical execution. This review aims to synthesize the current literature on key device- and procedure-related factors that influence radiofrequency lesioning and to clarify common misconceptions regarding LRFA. RECENT
findingsEmerging evidence suggests that several device-related parameters-including cannula and needle size, active tip length, temperature settings, lesioning duration, and needle angulation-affect lesion size and clinical outcomes. However, the impact of adjunctive steroid administration on lesion characteristics and therapeutic efficacy remains inconclusive. Furthermore, while some concerns have been raised regarding the potential for LRFA to accelerate spinal degeneration, definitive evidence is lacking. There is, however, a plausible association between LRFA and multifidus atrophy. The use of motor testing prior to ablation is warranted. Current data support the safety of LRFA in patients with posterior spinal instrumentation and implantable devices. Device- and procedure-specific variables may significantly influence LRFA lesion characteristics and clinical outcomes. While the safety profile of LRFA is generally favorable, potential complications exist, underscoring the need for a nuanced understanding of optimal procedural techniques. Despite its widespread adoption, misconceptions persist regarding optimal approaches, safety considerations, and determinants of efficacy. This review critically evaluates the existing literature to address these controversies and provide an evidence-based perspective on LRFA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40560301What 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.