Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40686693›Full record

Trial reportTurkish journal of medical sciences2025

Effectiveness of distal versus proximal greater occipital nerve pulsed radiofrequency in migraine management: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

Gülçin Babaoğlu, Şükriye Dadali, Ülkü Sabuncu, Erkan Yavuz Akçaboy, Şeref Çelik, Mustafa Yemliha Ayhan, Yağmur Can Dadakçi, Mustafa Cem Yilmaz, Şaziye Şahin

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

9 authors.

Gülçin BabaoğluDepartment of Pain Medicine, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Turkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1461-4092
Şükriye DadaliDepartment of Pain Medicine, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Turkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4204-4530
Ülkü SabuncuDepartment of Pain Medicine, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Turkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9031-2088
Erkan Yavuz AkçaboyDepartment of Pain Medicine, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Turkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9962-2090
Şeref ÇelikDepartment of Pain Medicine, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Turkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2360-0714
Mustafa Yemliha AyhanDepartment of Pain Medicine, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Turkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1035-2048
Yağmur Can DadakçiDepartment of Pain Medicine, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Turkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0899-4631
Mustafa Cem YilmazDepartment of Pain Medicine, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Turkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1077-3544
Şaziye ŞahinDepartment of Pain Medicine, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Turkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2044-1597

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background/aim: We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of distal versus proximal greater occipital nerve (GON) pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) treatments in patients with episodic or chronic migraine. Materials and methods: In this prospective, randomized controlled study, sixty participants were randomized to either distal GON PRF (n = 30) or proximal GON PRF (n = 30). Migraine related assessments were conducted at the baseline and at the first, second, and third month. Results: Baseline characteristics indicated a higher migraine burden in the proximal group, including increased monthly headache frequency (15.0 vs. 9.5 attacks, p = 0.007). Both groups experienced significant reductions in headache duration, severity and frequency over three months (Friedman test, p < 0.001). Notably, the proximal group experienced greater reductions in severe headache frequency at all time points (1st month: p = 0.004; 3rd month: p = 0.022) and total headache days by the third month (14.0 vs. 9.5 days, p = 0.039). The distal group exhibited some advantages in reducing headache severity (VAS), showing a trend toward improvement in the second month (p = 0.055) and achieving statistical significance by the third month (p = 0.011). No unexpected adverse effects were observed in either group. Conclusion: Both treatments were well-tolerated, with minimal adverse effects. Our findings indicate that both proximal and distal approaches are safe and effective for migraine management. The proximal approach might offer slightly superior outcomes for patients experiencing severe and frequent migraine attacks.

Indexed as

Migraine DisordersPulsed Radiofrequency TreatmentAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesTreatment OutcomeYoung Adultdistal approachgreater occipital nerveMigraineproximal approachpulsed radiofrequency

Identifiers

PMID40686693
PMCPMC12270285

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.