Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

Clinical Outcomes of Conventional Versus Lateral-Deployment RF Cannulas in Lumbar Medial Branch Radiofrequency Ablation: A Prospective Randomized Study.

Created on 23 Oct 2026

Authors

Ecem Kahraman, Alp Eren Çelenlioğlu, Sami Eksert, Mehmet Emin İnce, Fatih Şimşek, Ender Sir, Mehmet Emin Orhan

Published in

American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation. Oct 22, 2026. Epub Oct 22, 2026.

Abstract

To compare conventional monopolar and lateral-deployment RF cannulas for lumbar medial branch radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in chronic facet-mediated low back pain.
Single-center, randomized, participant-blinded, two-arm superiority trial. Ninety participants were randomized 1:1; 84 with complete 6-month data were analyzed. The primary outcome was change in Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) pain intensity from baseline to 6 months. Secondary outcomes were changes in the Modified Oswestry Disability Index (MODI) and SF-12 Physical (PCS) and Mental (MCS) Component Scores.
Mean NRS change was -2.81 points with the conventional cannula and -5.52 points with the lateral-deployment cannula. The age-adjusted between-group difference was -2.795 points (95% CI, -3.967 to -1.624; P<0.001). At 6 months, at least 50% NRS reduction was achieved by 16/42 (38.1%) and 31/42 (73.8%) participants, respectively (risk ratio, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.27-2.97; P=0.001). Age-adjusted MODI and SF-12 PCS changes favored the lateral-deployment cannula. No major procedure-related complications were observed.
The lateral-deployment cannula was associated with greater 6-month improvements in pain, disability, and physical health and with more participants achieving substantial pain relief. Larger trials with intention-to-treat analyses are needed.

PMID:
42908078
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 23 Oct 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Reviewers' rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 18
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement