• Bhagya Ranjan Jena, Anil Paswan, Yashpal Singh, Sandeep Loha, Anil Prasad Singh, and Virendra Rastogi.
• Department of Anaesthesia, Institute of Medical Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India.
• Anesth Essays Res. 2016 Sep 1; 10 (3): 602-606.

BackgroundRadiofrequency (RF) is a minimally invasive target-selective technique that has been used with success for many years in the treatment of different pathologies, such as low back pain, trigeminal neuralgia, and others.AimThe aim of this study is to compare different mode of RF - continuous RF (CRF) versus pulsed RF (PRF) along with steroid in the management of low back pain of discogenic origin.Setting And DesignProspective, randomized, double-blind trial.Materials And MethodsForty patients with chronic discogenic low back pain were randomized to receive CRF plus intradiscal triamcinolone 40 mg (Group 1) or to receive PRF plus intradiscal triamcinolone 40 mg (Group 2). Outcome measured includes immediate as well as long-term pain relief using visual analog scale, the Oswestry Disability Index and straight leg raising test.Statistical AnalysisThe continuous variables were compared by one-way analysis of variance test. Discrete variables were compared by Fisher's exact test/Chi-square test/Student's t-test, whichever appropriate. The value of P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.ResultsThere was a significant decrease in pain score after CRF without any added side effect. Pain relief after PRF was insignificant.ConclusionCRF with steroid seems to be better for treatment of chronic discogenic low back pain than PRF with steroid.

4 keywords...

hide…