Van Zundert et al.[37]
|
18 patients with cervical headache and cervico-brachialgia; PRF-DRG
|
13/18 patients >50% pain relief at 8 weeks, at 1 year 6 patients had continuing pain relief; no complications reported
|
First documented evidence of PRF treatment in cervical syndromes
|
Van Zundert et al.[16] P, R, DB, RCT, sham controlled
|
23 patients with Cervico brachial pain; 11 patients had PRF-DRG and 12 had Sham
|
3 months - 82% patients in the PRF-DRG group and 25–33% in the Sham group had successful results (P = 0.02–0.03)
|
PRF-DRG may provide pain relief in patients with cervico-brachial pain
|
Tsou et al.[38] Retrospective
|
127 patients; group A - back pain without lower limb pain, group B - back pain with lower limb pain
|
Successful treatment shown; At 3 months: Group A - 27/45 and Group B - 37/78 patients At 1 year: Group A - 20–45 patients and Group B - 34/74 patients
|
Pulsed radiofrequency applied at the L-2 DRG is safe and effective for treating for chronic low-back pain
|
Kroll et al.[22] Prospective, DB, randomised
|
50 patients treated with CRF or PRF of lumbar facets, and assessed with VAS, ODI -measured at baseline and 3 months
|
No difference in the two groups, however over time the CRF patients showed better scores than PRF
|
Effects of PRF may be limited by time when compared to CRF
|
Simopoulous et al.[25] Pilot - prospective RCT
|
26 patients with lumbosacral radicular pain grouped to PRF-DRG or PRF-DRG followed by CRF-DRG
|
At 2 months 70% of PRF showed significant reduction of pain scores compared to 83% in CRF after PRF, no statistical difference
|
PRF-DRG appears to be a good treatment without side effects for lumbosacral radicular pain
|
Lindner et al.[39] Retrospective study
|
48 patients with positive diagnostic blockade of lumbar medial branch, had PRF
|
21/29 patients with no previous surgery and 5/19 patients with previous surgery showed successful pain relief at 4 months, significant difference in PRF efficacy in between groups (P = 0.0028)
|
PRF of lumbar medial branch for facetogenic pain is safe and works well in patients who have not had back surgeries
|
Texiera et al.[40] Prospective, case series
|
8 patients with discography confirmed discogenic pain - intradiscal PRF
|
Significant drop in NRS scores at 3 months, 4 patients were reportedly pain free after 12 months
|
Intradiscal PRF merits a controlled prospective study
|
Chao et al.[15]
|
154 patients with cervical (n = 49), lumbar (n = 105) radicular pain due to herniated disc and FBSS
|
At 3 months 27/49 in cervical and 52/105 in lumbar patients had pain relief >50%
|
Application of PRF is a safe and useful intervention for cervical and lumbar radicular pain
|
Texiera et al.[14] Retrospective study
|
13 patients with lumbosacral radicular pain due to herniated disc had PRF-DRG
|
Significant pain reduction (P = 0.01), was found in 11 patients from 4 weeks lasting up to 15 months, only 1 patient had a small area of low sensation at L3 area in the last follow-up
|
PRF may potentially be a viable alternative for epidural steroid injections in the treatment of radicular pain
|
Shabat et al.[41] Retrospective
|
28 patients with chronic neuropathic pain of spinal origin had PRF-DRG
|
19 patients had successful pain relied lasting for an year, with no reported complication
|
PRF is a safe and an effective procedure for patients who suffer from chronic neuropathic pain from spinal origin
|
Tekin et al.[23] Prospective RCT
|
60 patients grouped with clinical diagnosis of facet joint pain - grouped into LA, PRF, and CRF groups
|
Pain relief in PRF and CRF better, however in the follow-up period the relief was not sustained in the PRF group
|
Pain relief with PRF is comparable to CRF, but the duration of effect is shorter
|
Mikeladze et al.[42] Retrospective study
|
114 patients with cervical and lumbar pain, responsive to diagnostic medial branch block-PRF
|
68 patients had significant pain relief lasting at least 4 months
|
PRF of medial branch is a successful intervention in selected patients with no complications
|