• World Neurosurg · Feb 2019

    Review Comparative Study

    Pulsed Radiofrequency Versus Continuous Radiofrequency for Facet Joint Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review.

    • Contreras Lopez William Omar WO Centro Internacional de Investigación NEMOD, Bucaramanga, Colombia; Division de Neurocirugía Funcional, Departamento de Neurocirugía, Clín, Paula Alejandra Navarro, Marcos David Vargas, Eduardo Alape, and Paul Anthony Camacho Lopez.
    • Centro Internacional de Investigación NEMOD, Bucaramanga, Colombia; Division de Neurocirugía Funcional, Departamento de Neurocirugía, Clínica FOSCAL, Bucaramanga, Colombia; Universidad Autónoma de Bucaramanga, UNAB, Bucaramanga, Colombia; Centro Colombiano y Fundación de Epilepsia y Enfermedades Neurológicas: FIRE, Cartagena, Colombia. Electronic address: williamomarcontreraslopez@hotmail.com.
    • World Neurosurg. 2019 Feb 1; 122: 390-396.

    ObjectiveTo compare pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) treatment with continuous radiofrequency (CRF) to improve pain, functionality, and safety profile in patients with facet joint chronic low back pain.MethodsA systematic, critical review of recent literature was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Clinical Trials, and LILACS databases were searched. Medical Subject Heading terms were "low back pain," "zygapophyseal joint," and "pulsed radiofrequency treatment." Original research articles in peer-reviewed journals were included in the review. The articles were thoroughly examined and compared on the basis of study design and outcomes. Only studies that met the eligibility criteria were included.ResultsThree randomized clinical trials comprising 103 patients (39 in PRF group, 44 in CRF group, and 20 in control group) were included in the final analysis. Two trials compared PRF with CRF, and 1 trial compared 3 groups: PRF, CRF, and control with intervention as conventional treatment. The studies reported greater pain control and better functionality with CRF compared with PRF. PRF showed a decrease in visual analog scale and Oswestry Disability Index in 2 studies, and 1 study reported increased pain and disability after the intervention. No side effects were reported.ConclusionsPRF treatment is less effective than CRF regarding pain control and return of functionality in patients with facet joint chronic low back pain. We recommend CRF with a large safety profile after conventional treatment.Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…