• HorsanaliBurcu OzalpBODepartment of Algology, Izmir Bakircay University, Cigli Training and Research Hospital, Izmir, Turkiye. and Derya Guner.
• Department of Algology, Izmir Bakircay University, Cigli Training and Research Hospital, Izmir, Turkiye.
• J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2024 Oct 1; 34 (10): 119411991194-1199.

ObjectiveTo compare two different algological intervention technique outcomes with ultrasound-guided genicular pulse radiofrequency (PRF) and fluoroscopy-guided intra-articular pulse radiofrequency for knee osteoarthritis-related pain.Study DesignObservational study. Place and Duration of the Study: Izmir Bakircay University, Cigli Training and Research Hospital and Health Science University Tepecik, Training and Research Hospital, Izmir, Turkiye, between March 2022 and May 2023.MethodologyPatients aged 60 years and above with stage 3 and 4 knee osteoarthritis, experiencing knee pain for more than six months, and non-responsive to conservative treatments were included. Patients with recent knee surgery or intra-articular injections and those ineligible for radiofrequency application were excluded. Ultrasound-guided genicular nerve PRF and fluoroscopy-guided intra-articular PRF were administered to the included patients. Pain and quality of life were evaluated using the visual analogue scale (VAS) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Index of Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) scores before and after the procedures.ResultsThe study included 64 patients. Both ultrasound-guided genicular PRF and fluoroscopy-guided intra-articular PRF resulted in significant reductions in VAS and WOMAC scores at 1 and 3 months after the procedures. There was no significant difference in efficacy between the two techniques.ConclusionUltrasound-guided genicular PRF and fluoroscopy-guided intra-articular PRF are effective and safe options for managing knee osteoarthritis-related pain.Key WordsOsteoarthritis, Pulse radiofrequency, Ultrasound, Fluoroscopy, Pain.

28 keywords...

hide…