ArticleRevista de neurologia2026
[Effectiveness and Risk of Recurrence of Pulsed Radiofrequency in Trigeminal Neuralgia and Chronic Cluster Headache].
Article in Revista de neurologia, 2026. 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
introductionPercutaneous pulsed radiofrequency (PPRF) is a minimally invasive neuromodulation technique used in chronic pain management. Our aim was to evaluate its effectiveness and safety in refractory cases of trigeminal neuralgia (TN) and chronic cluster headache (CH).
methodsWe conducted a retrospective study of patients with TN and CH diagnosed according to the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition (ICHD-3) criteria and treated with PPRF (Gasserian ganglion for TN and sphenopalatine ganglion for CH) over an 8-year period. Effectiveness at 3 months was assessed by evaluating reduction in the number of pain days in TN and number of attacks in CH, ≥50% response rate, visual analogue scale (VAS), Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I), and pain recurrence.
resultsTwenty-five patients met the inclusion criteria, including 19 with TN and 6 with CH, with a mean age of 76 and 52 years, respectively. Clinical improvement was observed in 14/19 (73.6%) patients with TN and 5/6 (83.3%) patients with CH. A ≥50% response rate was achieved in 11/14 (78.6%) patients with TN and 4/6 (66.7%) patients with CH. VAS scores decreased at 3 months in both groups (
conclusionsIn our series, PPRF appears to be an effective and safe treatment for refractory TN and CH. Although the study is retrospective and the sample size is limited, particularly in CH, these findings should be considered preliminary but clinically relevant. Despite the high recurrence rate, given its low complication profile, it may represent a treatment option for patients who are not candidates for surgical procedures.
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.