Radiofrequency Neurotomy for Chronic Facet Joint Related Neck Pain

Long-term Efficacy of Radiofrequency Neurotomy for Chronic Zygapophysial (Facet) Joint Related Neck Pain

This is a single-center, double blind, sham-controlled randomized trial (N: 34) to assess the long term efficacy of RF neurotomy of cervical medial branches. Patients with chronic unilateral neck pain who are found eligible and achieve ≥50% pain relief of two predictive and comparative test blocks will be included in the trial in a primary analysis. We will further test whether a strict selection of ≥80% pain relief better predicts efficacious RF neurotomy compared with a less strict selection of ≥50% to <80%. After 6 months sham-treated patients may also be offered active unblinded RF treatment. Demographic and clinical data will be recorded at baseline while primary and secondary outcome measurements are recollected after 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. Primary outcome measurements include self-reported neck function (NDI) and pain relief after 6 months.

Study Overview

• Status: Recruiting
• Conditions: Neck Pain
• Intervention / Treatment: Procedure: Radiofrequency neurotomy; Procedure: Sham treatment

Detailed Description

Chronic neck pain represents a common health problem. The mechanisms appear to be multifactorial. Researchers have suggested a disturbed interplay between the deep neck muscles and facet joints. In Europe and the US radiofrequency neurotomy has become a common treatment. The evidence base, however, is still insufficient. Thus, a double blind, sham-controlled, randomized, single-center trial is carried out. Based on current data and a single center study design, 34 randomized participants, completing the trial, have shown adequate to obtain sufficient statistical power. To simplify the data collection a digital internet based program is used. Patients with chronic unilateral neck pain, referred to Oslo University Hospital or responding to public announcements, and not responding to non-interventional treatment will be screened. Those who are found eligible and achieve ≥50% pain relief after predictive and comparative test blocks, will be included in the study. We will further test whether a strict selection of ≥80% pain relief better predicts efficacious RF neurotomy compared with a less strict selection of ≥50% to <80%. After 6 months participants who received sham and still suffer from neck pain, will be offered unblinded RF neurotomy and additional 12 month unblinded follow up if the results support this treatment. Demographic and clinical data will be recorded at baseline. The primary and secondary outcome measurements are recollected after 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. Primary outcome measurements include self-reported neck function (NDI) and pain relief after 6 months. Regression analyses will be used to identify how pain relief of two test blocks and pain catastrophizing predict response to RF neurotomy. If RF neurotomy is found superior to sham treatment, this may be implemented in the national treatment program for selected patients with chronic neck pain.

• Study Type: Interventional
• Enrollment (Estimated): 34
• Phase: Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

• Study Contact: Name: Gunnvald Kvarstein, Dr. Med; Phone Number: +47 92295309; Email: gunnvald.kvarstein@uit.no
• Study Contact Backup: Name: Bård Lundeland, PhD; Phone Number: +47 41238959; Email: 'Bård Lundeland' <baalun@ous-hf.no>

Study Locations

• Norway
  • Oslo, Norway, 4950
    • Recruiting
    • Department of Pain Management and Research Oslo University Hospital
    • Contact: Gunnvald Kvarstein, PhD; Phone Number: +47923026161; Email: gunnvald.kvarstein@uit.no
    • Contact: Bård Lundeland, PhD; Phone Number: 4+4723026161; Email: bard.lundeland@ous-hf.no
  • Torgarden
    • Trondheim, Torgarden, Norway, 3250
      • Recruiting
      • Department for Pain and Complex Disorders
      • Contact: Petter Borchgrevink, PhD; Phone Number: +4772822500; Email: petter.borchgrevink@ntnu.no

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: 18 years to 80 years (Adult, Older Adult)
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No

Description

Inclusion Criteria

• Min 18 years and Maximum 80 years
• Read and understand Norwegian
• Stable neck pain >12 months, with or without unilateral headache
• Average of worst pain intensity last three days ≥ 4 out of maximum 10
• Neck Disability Index >15 points or > 30 percentage points.
• At least two predictive blocks ≥ 50% pain relief 30 to 60 minutes after lidocaine and 30 to 180 minutes after bupivacaine .

Exclusion Criteria:

• Serious cervical pathology (acute cervical disc herniation, radiculopathy, myelopathy, spinal anomalies and chronic widespread pain
• Opioid consumption > 50 morphine equivalents/day
• Ongoing litigation process and applying for disability insurance/benefits
• Serious psychiatric disorder (DSM-IV-TR) diagnosed at a psychiatric unit, including suicidal thoughts and somatization (from Hopkins Symptom Check List 25 ≥ 2.5)
• Ongoing addictive behavior ( diagnostic criteria in Statistical Manual, 4th Edition)
• Unstable medical condition (ASA 4, serious vascular disease like unstable angina)
• Bacterial infection
• Malignancy
• Chronic generalized pain
• Hypersensitive to contrast agents or local anesthetics
• Pregnancy
• Bleeding diathesis
• Previously radiofrequency neurotomy

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

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

Number of Arms

2

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm	Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: Radiofrequency neurotomy group; Unilateral radiofrequency neurotomy of medial branches to the dorsal ramus at one or two cervical levels	Procedure: Radiofrequency neurotomy; RF neurotomy represents a nerve destructive, coagulating technique affecting the conduction through all nerve fibers.
Sham Comparator: Sham group; Unilateral sham treatment of medial branches to the dorsal ramus at one or two cervical levels	Procedure: Sham treatment; Sham treatment represents no coagulation of the nerve and will not affect the nerve conduction.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Change in pain intensity (numeric pain scale) after RF neurotomy vs sham treatment	Two independent group comparison of change in pain intensity (triplicate values from three consecutive days on a numeric pain scale 0-10 which provides a continuous variable)	6 months
Change in neck function after RF neurotomy vs sham treatment	Two independent group comparison of change of Neck Disability Index scores -continuous variable 0-50)	6 months

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Change in pain intensity (numeric pain scale) after RF neurotomy vs sham treatment	Two independent group comparison of change in pain intensity (triplicate values from three consecutive days on a numeric pain scale 0-10 which provides a continuous variable)	1 month
Change in pain intensity (numeric pain scale) after RF neurotomy vs sham treatment	Two independent group comparison of change in pain intensity (triplicate values from three consecutive days on a numeric pain scale 0-10 which provides a continuous variable)	3 months
Change in pain intensity (numeric pain scale) after RF neurotomy vs sham treatment	Two independent group comparison of change in pain intensity (triplicate values from three consecutive days on a numeric pain scale 0-10 which provides a continuous variable)	9 months
Change in pain intensity (numeric pain scale) after RF neurotomy vs sham treatment	Two independent group comparison of change in pain intensity (triplicate values from three consecutive days on a numeric pain scale 0-10 which provides a continuous variable)	12 months
Change in pain intensity (categorical pain scale) after RF neurotomy vs sham treatment	Two independent group comparison of change in pain intensity (categorical 6-point pain scale wth the alternatives worse, unchanged, <50% reduced, ≥50% reduced, and pain free which provides a categorial variable)	3 months
Change in pain intensity (categorical pain scale) after RF neurotomy vs sham treatment	Two independent group comparison of change in pain intensity (categorical 6-point pain scale wth the alternatives worse, unchanged, <50% reduced, ≥50% reduced, and pain free which provides a categorial variable)	6 months
Change in pain intensity (categorical pain scale) after RF neurotomy vs sham treatment	Two independent group comparison of change in pain intensity (categorical 6-point pain scale wth the alternatives worse, unchanged, <50% reduced, ≥50% reduced, and pain free which provides a categorial variable)	9 months
Change in pain intensity (categorical pain scale) after RF neurotomy vs sham treatment	Two independent group comparison of change in pain intensity (categorical 6-point pain scale wth the alternatives worse, unchanged, <50% reduced, ≥50% reduced, and pain free which provides a categorial variable)	12 months
Change in health related quality of life after RF neurotomy vs sham treatment	Two independent group comparison of change of EuroQuol-5-Dimensions Index scores (continuous variable from -0.59 to 1.00)	6 months
Change in health related quality of life after RF neurotomy vs sham treatment	Two independent group comparison of change of EuroQuol-5-Dimensions Index scores (continuous variable from -0.59 to 1.00)	12 months
Change in drug consumption after RF neurotomy vs sham treatment	Two independent group comparison of change of the numbers of analgesic drugs (continuous variable)	6 months
Change in drug consumption after RF neurotomy vs sham treatment	Two independent group comparison of change of the numbers of analgesic drugs (continuous variable)	12 months
Change in number of neck/pain treatments after RF neurotomy vs sham treatment	Two independent group comparison of change of the numbers of neck/pain treatments (continuous variable)	6 months
How highly positive response to test block influences neck function after RF treatment	Regression analysis on how ≥80% pain relief (independent categorical variable) predicts >15% reduction of Neck disability Score (categorical variable) after RF neurotomy	6 months
How moderately positive response to test block influences neck function after RF treatment	Regression analysis on how ≥50% and <80% pain relief (independent categorical variable) predicts >15% reduction of Neck disability Score (categorical variable) after RF neurotomy	6 months
How highly positive response to test block influences 30% pain relief after RF treatment	Regression analysis on how ≥80% pain relief (independent categorical variable) predicts >30% reduction in pain intensity (categorical variable) after RF neurotomy	6 months
How moderately positive response to test block influences 30% pain relief after RF treatment	Regression analysis on how ≥50% and <80% pain relief (independent categorical variable) predicts >30% reduction in pain intensity (categorical variable) after RF neurotomy	6 months
How highly positive response to test block influences 50% pain relief after RF treatment	Regression analysis on how ≥80% pain relief (independent categorical variable) predicts >50% reduction in pain intensity (categorical variable) after RF neurotomy	6 months
How moderately positive response to test block influences 50% pain relief after RF treatment	Regression analysis on how ≥50 and <80% pain relief (independent categorical variable) predicts >50% reduction in pain intensity (categorical variable) after RF neurotomy	6 months
How catastrophizing influences neck function after RF treatment.	Regression analysis on how Pain Catastrophizing Scale score ≥30 (independent categorical variable) predict ≥ 15% reduction of Neck Disability Score (categorical variable) after RF neurotomy vs Pain Catastrophizing Scale score < 30	6 months
How catastrophizing influences pain relief after RF treatment.	Regression analysis on how Pain Catastrophizing Scale scores ≥30 (independent categorical variable) predict >30% reduction in pain intensity (categorical variable) after RF neurotomy vs Pain Catastrophizing Scale scores < 30	6 months
Change in mental distress after RF neurotomy vs sham treatment.	Two independent group comparison of change in Hopkin Symptom Check List (HSCL 25) sumscore which is a continuous variable on anxiety and depressive symptoms, ranging from 1 (normal) to 4 (worse)	6 months
Change in mental distress after RF neurotomy vs sham treatment.	Two independent group comparison of change in Hopkin Symptom Check List (HSCL 25) sumscore which is a continuous variable on anxiety and depressive symptoms, ranging from 1 (normal) to 4 (worse)	12 months
Change in sleep disturbances after RF neurotomy vs sham treatment.	Two independent group comparison of change in sleep. Sleep Subscale in Neck Disability Index part 7. A continuous variable based on a 6 point scale ranging from 0 to 6 where 0 is no problem and 6 i severe insomnia.	6 months
Change in sleep disturbances after RF neurotomy vs sham treatment.	Two independent group comparison of change in sleep. Sleep Subscale in Neck Disability Index part 7. A continuous variable based on a 6 point scale ranging from 0 to 6 where 0 is no problem and 6 i severe insomnia.	12 months
Change in neck function after RF neurotomy vs sham treatment	Two independent group comparison of change of Neck Disability Index scores -continuous variable 0-50	12 months
Change in pain intensity (categorical pain scale) after RF neurotomy vs sham treatment	Two independent group comparison of change in pain intensity (categorical 6-point pain scale with the alternatives worse, unchanged, <50% reduced, ≥50% reduced, and pain free which provides a categorial variable)	1 month

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: Oslo University Hospital
• Collaborators: St. Olavs Hospital
• Investigators: Principal Investigator: Gunnvald Kvarstein, Dr. Med, Oslo University Hospital

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Actual): January 1, 2019
• Primary Completion (Estimated): December 14, 2024
• Study Completion (Estimated): December 14, 2025

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: February 20, 2017
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: February 23, 2017
• First Posted (Actual): March 1, 2017

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Estimated): December 11, 2023
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: December 4, 2023
• Last Verified: December 1, 2023

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Keywords: radiofrequency neurotomy; zygapophyseal joint
• Additional Relevant MeSH Terms: Pain; Neurologic Manifestations; Neck Pain
• Other Study ID Numbers: 2015/2194

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

• Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?: YES
• IPD Plan Description: Individual Participant Data Sharing Plan. In accordance with the general data sharing policy at OUH, the deidentified, individual data can be made available for external researchers from 9 months to 5 years after publication. However, to get access the researchers need to provide a methodologically sound proposal in accordance with the institutional guidelines and sign a data access agreement.
• IPD Sharing Time Frame: From 9 months to 5 years after publication
• IPD Sharing Access Criteria: To get access the researchers need to provide a methodologically sound proposal in accordance with the institutional guidelines and sign a data access agreement.
• IPD Sharing Supporting Information Type: STUDY_PROTOCOL; SAP; ICF; CSR

Drug and device information, study documents

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product: No
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product: No