ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2026
36-Month prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing endoscopic facet denervation and cryoneurolysis for chronic lumbar facet joint pain.
Article in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCryoneurolysis and endoscopic facet denervation are established minimally invasive treatment options for lumbar facet joint-mediated pain; however, comparative evidence regarding their long-term effectiveness remains limited. This study compared the 36-month clinical outcomes of both procedures in a prospective multicenter randomized clinical trial.
methodsEighty patients with lumbar facet joint-mediated pain confirmed by dual controlled medial branch blocks (≥ 70% pain relief) were randomized to undergo cryoneurolysis (n = 40) or endoscopic facet denervation (n = 40). The primary endpoint was low back pain intensity measured using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at the predefined 36-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes included disability, health-related quality of life, and reintervention rates. Longitudinal mixed-effects modelling and conservative sensitivity analyses were performed.
resultsBoth treatment groups demonstrated significant and sustained improvements in pain, disability, and health-related quality of life compared with baseline. No statistically significant between-group difference was observed for the primary endpoint at 36 months. Longitudinal mixed-effects modelling demonstrated no significant treatment-by-time interaction (p = 0.74), with an adjusted between-group difference of 0.01 NRS points (95% CI -1.07 to 1.10; p = 0.98). Sensitivity analyses yielded findings consistent with the primary mixed-effects analysis. Reintervention was required in 8 of 40 patients (20.0%) in the cryoneurolysis group and 12 of 40 patients (30.0%) in the endoscopic denervation group (p = 0.44).
conclusionBoth cryoneurolysis and endoscopic facet denervation were associated with sustained improvements in pain, disability, and health-related quality of life in carefully selected patients with lumbar facet joint-mediated pain. No statistically significant differences in long-term pain trajectories were observed between treatment groups. Although some secondary analyses numerically favored cryoneurolysis, the study was not designed or powered to establish superiority, equivalence, or non-inferiority between treatment modalities. Larger prospective studies are warranted to confirm these findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42696034What 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.