Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of high-voltage versus standard-voltage pulsed radiofrequency ablation for patients with neuropathic pain: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) ablation is commonly used for the treatment of neuropathic pain (NP). However, it is unclear whether increasing the output voltage of PRF can safely improve its efficacy. This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of high-voltage PRF ablation and standard-voltage PRF ablation for the treatment of patients with NP.

Methods and analysis

We will search PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, conference proceedings for relevant abstracts, clinical trials registers (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the WHO's International Clinical Trial Registry Platform (from the date of inception until 15 March 2022). Only randomised controlled trials will be included. Two reviewers (YJ and GF) will independently perform study screening and selection, data extraction, risk-of-bias assessment and quality-of-evidence assessment. The primary outcome of this meta-analysis will be the efficiency rate in patients with NP. The secondary outcomes will include numeric rating scale score, visual analogue scale score, time to take effect, rescue drug dosage, quality of life using the health questionnaire (SF-36) and the incidence of adverse events. Meta-analyses will be conducted using standard meta-analysis software (RevMan V.5.3, The Nordic Cochrane Center, The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark).

Ethics and dissemination

The requirement for ethical approval was waived as our systematic review will be based on the published literature. The results of this study will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal.

Prospero registration number

CRD42022297804.

SUBMITTER: Jia Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9272125 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:We systematically reviewed the evidence on the efficacy and safety of dorsal root ganglion (DRG) targeted pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) versus any comparator for treatment of non-neuropathic pain. METHODS:We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, clinicaltrials.gov and WHO clinical trial register until January 8, 2019. All study designs were eligible. Two authors independently conducted literature screening. Primary outcomes were pain intensity and serious adverse events (SAEs). Secondary outcomes were any other pain-related outcome and any other safety outcome that was reported. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane tool and Risk of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I). We conducted narrative evidence synthesis and assessed the conclusiveness of included studies regarding efficacy and safety. RESULTS:We included 17 studies with 599 participants, which analyzed various pain syndromes. Two studies were randomized controlled trials; both included participants with low back pain (LBP). Non-randomized studies included patients with the following indications: LBP, postsurgical pain, pain associated with herpes zoster, cervicogenic headache, complex regional pain syndrome type 1, intractable vertebral metastatic pain, chronic scrotal and inguinal pain, occipital radiating pain in rheumatoid arthritis and chronic migraine. In these studies, the PRF was usually initiated after other treatments have failed. Eleven studies had positive conclusive statements (11/17) about efficacy; the remaining had positive inconclusive statements. Only three studies provided conclusiveness of evidence statements regarding safety - two indicated that the evidence was positive conclusive, and one positive inconclusive. The risk of bias was predominantly unclear in randomized and serious in non-randomized studies. CONCLUSION:Poor quality and few participants characterize evidence about benefits and harms of DRG PRF in patients with non-neuropathic pain. Results from available studies should only be considered preliminary. Not all studies have reported data regarding the safety of the intervention, but those that did, indicate that the intervention is relatively safe. As the procedure is non-destructive and early results are promising, further comparative studies about PRF in non-neuropathic pain syndromes would be welcomed.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Pulsed field ablation (PFA) can be myocardium selective, potentially sparing the esophagus during left atrial ablation. In an in vivo porcine esophageal injury model, we compared the effects of newer biphasic PFA with radiofrequency ablation (RFA). METHODS:In 10 animals, under general anesthesia, the lower esophagus was deflected toward the inferior vena cava using an esophageal deviation balloon, and ablation was performed from within the inferior vena cava at areas of esophageal contact. Four discrete esophageal sites were targeted in each animal: 6 animals received 8 PFA applications/site (2 kV, multispline catheter), and 4 animals received 6 clusters of irrigated RFA applications (30 W×30 seconds, 3.5 mm catheter). All animals were survived to 25 days, sacrificed, and the esophagus submitted for pathological examination, including 10 discrete histological sections/esophagus. RESULTS:The animals weight increased by 13.7±6.2% and 6.8±6.3% (P=0.343) in the PFA and RFA cohorts, respectively. No PFA animals (0 of 6, 0%) developed abnormal in-life observations, but 1 of 4 RFA animals (25%) developed fever and dyspnea. On necropsy, no PFA animals (0 of 6, 0%) demonstrated esophageal lesions. In contrast, esophageal injury occurred in all RFA animals (4 of 4, 100%; P=0.005): a mean of 1.5 mucosal lesions/animal (length, -21.8±8.9 mm; width, -4.9±1.4 mm) were observed, including one esophago-pulmonary fistula and deep esophageal ulcers in the other animals. Histological examination demonstrated tissue necrosis surrounded by acute and chronic inflammation and fibrosis. The necrotic RFA lesions involved multiple esophageal tissue layers with evidence of arteriolar medial thickening and fibrosis of periesophageal nerves. Abscess formation and full-thickness esophageal wall disruptions were seen in areas of perforation/fistula. CONCLUSIONS:In this novel porcine model of esophageal injury, biphasic PFA induced no chronic histopathologic esophageal changes, while RFA demonstrated a spectrum of esophageal lesions including fistula and deep esophageal ulcers and abscesses.

Project description:Pudendal neuralgia (PN) is a complex disease with various clinical characteristics, and there is no treatment showing definite effectiveness. This study is aimed at evaluating the clinical efficacy of ultrasound-guided high-voltage long-duration pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) for PN. Two cadavers (one male, one female) were dissected to provide evidence for localization of the pudendal nerve. Patients diagnosed as PN who failed or were intolerant in regular medication were screened for diagnostic local anesthesia block of the pudendal nerve before recruitment. Twenty PN patients were enrolled in this study. In the PRF procedure, the needle tip was inserted medially into the internal pudendal artery under ultrasound guidance. The position of the PRF needle tip was then adjusted by the response of the pudendal nerve to the electrical stimulation within the pudendal area (42°C, a series of 2 Hz, and 20 ms width pulses that lasted for 900 s). Alleviation of pain was assessed by the visual analogue scale (VAS) and sitting time pretreatment and on 7 d, 14 d, 1 m, 2 m, 3 m, and 6 m posttreatment in outpatient follow-up or by telephone interview. Two patients were lost due to intervention-irrelevant reasons. Patients showed significantly decreased VAS scores on 7 d after RFP, compared with pretreatment status (7.0 ± 0.9 vs. 3.2 ± 1.7, P < 0.001). The efficacy remained steady till the end of 6 months, with a final remission rate of 88.9%. Sitting time also significantly lengthened following PRF (7 d, 14 d, 1 m, 2 m, 3 m, and 6 m vs. pretreatment, all P < 0.05). Only short-term ipsilateral involuntary convulsion of the lower extremity was reported in one patient, who recovered within 12 h. Six patients were treated with nonsteroidal drugs for a short time. All patients stopped taking medication finally. In conclusion, the ultrasound-guided high-voltage long-duration PRF approach not only reduced the pelvic pain caused by PN but also improved the quality of life by extending sitting time without nerve injury.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) is a minimally invasive interventional technique that provides a novel and effective treatment strategy for neuropathic pain (NP). PRF is advantageous because it does not damage nerves and avoids sensory loss after treatment. At present, animal studies have demonstrated that PRF is safe and effective for relieving the NP associated with sciatic nerve damage in rats with chronic constriction injury (CCI). However, the mechanism through which this effect occurs is unknown. An increasing body of evidence shows that the expression of the P2X ligand-gated ion channel 3 (P2X3) receptor is closely related to NP; this study was to investigate whether the expression of this receptor is involved in NP relief due to PRF. METHODS:A total of 36 healthy adult male Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats were randomly divided into three groups: Sham group, CCI group, and PRF group. The right sciatic nerve was ligated in CCI group and PRF group to establish a CCI model; the right sciatic nerve was separated but not ligated in Sham group. On day 14 after the operation, PRF was administered to the ligated sciatic nerve in PRF group (42°C, 45 V, 2 min). A non-live electrode was placed at the exposed sciatic nerve for the rats in Sham and CCI groups. The hindpaw withdrawal threshold (HWT) and thermal withdrawal latency (TWL) were measured at the right hindpaw at different time points before and after PRF or sham therapy. On day 28 after treatment, the dorsal root ganglion (DRG) and spinal dorsal horn of the right L4-6 were harvested from each group to determine the mRNA and protein levels of the P2X3 receptor. RESULTS:On day 28 after PRF treatment, the HWT (8.33?±?0.67?g vs. 3.62?±?0.48?g) and TWL (25.42?±?1.90?s vs. 15.10?±?1.71?s) were significantly higher in PRF group as compared to CCI group (P?<?0.05). The mRNA expression of the P2X3 receptor in the DRG in PRF group was 23.7% lower than that in CCI group (P?<?0.05), in the spinal dorsal horns in PRF group was 22.7% lower than that in CCI group (P?<?0.05). The protein expression of the P2X3 receptor in the DRG in PRF group was 27.8% lower than that in CCI group (P?<?0.05), in the spinal dorsal horns in PRF group was 35.6% lower than that in CCI group (P?<?0.05). CONCLUSION:PRF possibly reduces NP in CCI rats by inhibiting the expression of the P2X3 receptor in the L4-6 DRG and spinal dorsal horns.