ArticleInterventional pain medicine2026
Lumbar medial branch radiofrequency neurotomy in a patient with a leadless pacemaker: a case report.
Article in Interventional pain medicine, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Facet-mediated lumbar pain is commonly treated with radiofrequency neurotomy (RFN) following confirmatory medial branch blocks. Because RFN generates electrical current, concerns exist regarding electromagnetic interference (EMI) in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices, particularly leadless pacemakers, for which limited procedural guidance is available. Case report: We present the case of an 81-year-old man with chronic low back pain and a right ventricular leadless pacemaker (Medtronic Micra) who underwent lumbar RFN after successful diagnostic blocks. Pre-procedural electrophysiology evaluation confirmed he was not pacemaker dependent, and the device was interrogated without reprogramming. Bipolar lesioning was performed with continuous cardiac monitoring. The procedure was completed without complication, and post-procedural interrogation demonstrated normal device function. The patient reported significant pain relief at follow-up. Discussion: This case highlights that lumbar RFN can be safely performed in patients with a leadless pacemaker when a multidisciplinary approach is utilized. Key considerations include confirmation of device type and pacemaker dependency, pre-procedural interrogation, use of bipolar lesioning to reduce EMI risk, and continuous peri-procedural monitoring. As leadless pacemakers become increasingly prevalent, further research is needed to guide specialty-specific recommendations for interventional pain procedures involving radiofrequency-based therapies.
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.