High Versus Standard Voltage Pulsed Radiofrequency for Cervical Nerve Roots Injection in Refractory Chronic Unilateral Cervical Radicular Pain
Comparison Between the Effectiveness of Ultrasound-Guided High Voltage Pulsed Radiofrequency Versus Standard Voltage Pulsed Radiofrequency for Cervical Nerve Roots in Patients With Refractory Chronic Unilateral Cervical Radicular Pain
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
-
Fayoum, Egypt, 61511
- Mina Raouf
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Age between 20 and 70 years, both genders.
- American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status grades I or II.
- Unilateral cervical radicular pain secondary to cervical disc prolapse affecting single nerve root which was refractory to conventional conservative and physiotherapy measures for 12 weeks or more.
- All candidates received 1 millilitre of 2% lidocaine via an ultrasound-guided diagnostic nerve block and informed at least 50% momentary reduction of their pain.
- Diagnosis was confirmed by cervical MRI and nerve conduction tests.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Refusal to participate.
- Cervical radiculopathy pain recurrence after surgery.
- Previous attempt of radiofrequency ablation.
- Concomitant coagulopathic state ( decompensated liver disease, clopidogrel use) .
- Metastatic lesion in the cervical vertebral column.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Treatment
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: Double
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Active Comparator: Group H ( high voltage) radiofrequency
Group H, involved a high voltage PRF technique, where the voltage started at 65 V and could be adjusted up to 80 V based on patient tolerance.
Both protocols involved two cycles of PRF application, with each cycle lasting 240 seconds and comprising alternating periods of current application and deactivation.
The pulse rate frequency was set at 2 Hertz (Hz), resulting in two active phases/second (20 milliseconds (ms) of current application followed by 480 ms without stimulation).
|
nvolved a high voltage PRF technique, where the voltage started at 65 V and could be adjusted up to 80 V based on patient tolerance.
Both protocols involved two cycles of PRF application, with each cycle lasting 240 seconds and comprising alternating periods of current application and deactivation.
The pulse rate frequency was set at 2 Hertz (Hz), resulting in two active phases/second (20 milliseconds (ms) of current application followed by 480 ms without stimulation)
|
|
Active Comparator: Group S ( standard) radiofrequency
utilized a standard voltage PRF technique, administering PRF at a fixed voltage of 45 volts (V).
|
A standard voltage PRF technique, administering PRF at a fixed voltage of 45 volts (V)
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
visual analogue score
Time Frame: pre-treatment, 1,3, and 6 month after intervention
|
Number of patients with successful pain relief at 6 months post-intervention which is defined as more than or equal 50% reduction in VAS from pre-interventional level Vas score ranges from 0 to ten . 0= NO pain.... 1-3= mild pain .... 4-6 = moderate pain ... 6-10= severe untearable pain |
pre-treatment, 1,3, and 6 month after intervention
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Neck disability index
Time Frame: pre-treatment, 1,3 and 6 months after intervention
|
1- the impact of treatment on the Neck Disability Index which was evaluated before treatment and at 6 months following treatment
|
pre-treatment, 1,3 and 6 months after intervention
|
|
Incidence of procedure related adverse events
Time Frame: 6 hours after the procedure
|
cervical epidural hematoma, nerve injury
|
6 hours after the procedure
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Actual)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- R-247
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.