Sidekick vs Conventional Cannula in Lumbar Medial Branch Radiofrequency Ablation (SIDE-RFA)

March 11, 2026 updated by: Sami Eksert, Saglik Bilimleri Universitesi Gulhane Tip Fakultesi

Clinical Outcomes of Conventional Versus Sidekick Cannulas in Lumbar Medial Branch Radiofrequency Ablation: A Prospective Randomized Study

Lumbar facet joint-mediated chronic low back pain is a common cause of disability. Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of the lumbar medial branches is an established interventional pain treatment. Different cannula designs may influence lesion geometry and clinical outcomes.

This prospective randomized study aims to compare the clinical outcomes of conventional cannulas and sidekick cannulas used during lumbar medial branch radiofrequency ablation. Patients with chronic lumbar facet joint pain who meet inclusion criteria will be randomly assigned to receive RFA using either a conventional cannula or a sidekick cannula technique.

The primary objective is to evaluate pain reduction following the procedure. Secondary outcomes include functional improvement and duration of pain relief during follow-up.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Completed

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

Chronic low back pain related to lumbar facet joints is a frequent clinical problem in pain medicine. Lumbar medial branch radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is widely used for the treatment of facet-mediated pain when diagnostic blocks are positive.

Cannula design and electrode orientation may affect lesion size and nerve capture during RFA. The sidekick cannula has been developed to optimize lesion orientation relative to the target nerve and potentially improve procedural efficiency and clinical outcomes compared with conventional cannulas.

This prospective randomized clinical study is conducted to compare the effectiveness of conventional cannulas and sidekick cannulas in lumbar medial branch radiofrequency ablation.

Eligible adult patients with chronic lumbar facet joint-mediated pain confirmed by diagnostic medial branch blocks will be enrolled. Participants will be randomly allocated to one of two groups: RFA performed with a conventional cannula or RFA performed with a sidekick cannula.

Pain intensity, functional outcomes, and treatment response will be evaluated during follow-up visits. The results of this study aim to determine whether cannula design influences procedural success and clinical outcomes in lumbar medial branch radiofrequency ablation.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
82

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • Turkey (Türkiye)
      • Ankara, Turkey (Türkiye), 06010
        • Gulhane Training and Research Hospital, Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

Age ≥18 years

  • Chronic lumbar facet-mediated low back pain lasting more than 3 months
  • Failure of conservative treatment including physical therapy and medical management
  • Positive diagnostic medial branch block
  • Patients scheduled for lumbar medial branch radiofrequency ablation

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Previous lumbar radiofrequency ablation at the same level
  • Coagulopathy or anticoagulant therapy that cannot be discontinued
  • Local infection at the procedure site
  • Severe spinal deformity or instability
  • Pregnancy
  • Inability to provide informed consent

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Double

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
Active Comparator: Conventional Cannula
Lumbar medial branch radiofrequency ablation performed using a conventional radiofrequency cannula.
Procedure: Lumbar Medial Branch Radiofrequency Ablation
Lumbar medial branch radiofrequency ablation performed for chronic lumbar facet-mediated pain. The procedure is performed under fluoroscopic guidance .
Drug: Triamcinolone (20 g)
Triamcinolone acetonide administered after ablation as part of the post-procedural injection mixture.
Drug: bupivacain 0.5% 2ml
Bupivacaine 0.5% administered after ablation as part of the post-procedural injection mixture.
Device: conventional radiofrequency cannul
standard straight radiofrequency cannula used during lumbar medial branch radiofrequency ablation
Experimental: Sidekick Cannula
Lumbar medial branch radiofrequency ablation performed using a sidekick radiofrequency cannula.
Procedure: Lumbar Medial Branch Radiofrequency Ablation
Lumbar medial branch radiofrequency ablation performed for chronic lumbar facet-mediated pain. The procedure is performed under fluoroscopic guidance .
Drug: Triamcinolone (20 g)
Triamcinolone acetonide administered after ablation as part of the post-procedural injection mixture.
Drug: bupivacain 0.5% 2ml
Bupivacaine 0.5% administered after ablation as part of the post-procedural injection mixture.
Device: sidekick radiofrecueny cannula
sidekick radiofrequeny cannula designed to preduce a larger lesion during lumbaar brach medial branch radiofrequeny ablation

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change in pain intensity (Numeric Rating Scale)
Time Frame: Baseline to 6 months
Change in pain intensity measured by Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) Pain intensity will be measured using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) ranging from 0 to 10, where 0 represents no pain and 10 represents the worst imaginable pain. Higher scores indicate greater pain intensity.
Baseline to 6 months

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Functional improvement
Time Frame: 6 months
Functional status will be assessed using the Modified Oswestry Disability Index (MODI), a validated questionnaire evaluating disability related to low back pain. The MODI consists of 10 items with a total score ranging from 0 to 100, where higher scores indicate greater disability and worse functional status. Changes in MODI scores will be evaluated during follow-up after lumbar medial branch radiofrequency ablation using conventional or sidekick cannulas.
6 months

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Saglik Bilimleri Universitesi Gulhane Tip Fakultesi

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
August 1, 2024

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
August 1, 2025

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
September 24, 2025

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
March 6, 2026

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
March 11, 2026

First Posted (Actual)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
March 16, 2026

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
March 16, 2026

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
March 11, 2026

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
March 1, 2026

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • AEŞH-BADEK-2024-1021

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

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.

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings