• Tao Hong, Shimeng Wang, Yuanyuan Ding, Guangxiao Li, Zhenkai Han, and Peng Yao.
• Department of Pain Management, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
• Pain Physician. 2020 Sep 1; 23 (5): E549-E558.

BackgroundIntraarticular pulsed radiofrequency (IAPRF) for the treatment of painful knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a less invasive treatment method. It has fewer adverse effects and can quickly reduce KOA-related pain and improve knee joint dysfunction.ObjectivesWe compared the effectiveness of high- and low-voltage IAPRF for the treatment of chronic knee pain.Study DesignRetrospective comparative study design.SettingThis study took place at Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University.MethodsA total of 57 patients with KOA who were hospitalized between July 2018 and July 2019 were randomly allocated into the high-voltage (n = 29) and low-voltage (n = 28) IAPRF groups. IAPRF was performed under the guidance of computed tomography (CT). Numeric Rating Scale (NRS-11), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), degree of pain relief, global perceived effect, and side effects at baseline and 1 week, 2 weeks, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after the procedure were recorded and analyzed.ResultsNRS-11 scores decreased significantly in both groups after the procedure, but gradually increased after the 6-month follow-up period. There was a significant difference in NRS-11 scores between the 2 groups at all follow-up periods postprocedure. OKS were similar between the 2 groups. Patients with pain relief rate 50% or greater at 1, 3, and 6 months after the procedure accounted for 72.41%, 72.41%, and 55.17% in the high-voltage group, and 46.43%, 46.43%, and 28.57% in the low-voltage group, respectively. The difference between the 2 groups was statistically significant. No significant adverse reactions were observed in the 2 groups, however, patient satisfaction in the high-voltage group was significantly higher compared with patients in the low-voltage group.LimitationsThis study was a single-center retrospective study with a relatively small sample cohort and short follow-up period.ConclusionsCT-guided high-voltage IAPRF is more beneficial in reducing knee pain and improving knee function compared with low-voltage IAPRF. In addition, patients who received high-voltage IAPRF were more satisfied with their treatment.

22 keywords...

hide…