ArticleCardiovascular and interventional radiology2024
Efficacy and Safety of Cryoablation Compared with Cooled Radiofrequency Ablation of Genicular Nerves in Advanced Osteoarthritis of the Knee: A Study Protocol of Single-Centric, Assessor-Blinded, Randomized, Parallel-Group, Non-inferiority Study.
Article in Cardiovascular and interventional radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genicular Nerve Ultrasound-Guided Cryoanalgesia for the Treatment of Chronic Knee Joint Pain: An Observational Retrospective Study.Pain and therapy · 2025Article
- Minimally Invasive Therapies for Knee Osteoarthritis.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIn patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis knee (OAK), cryoneurolysis (CRYO) and cooled radiofrequency ablation (C-RFA) are reported to be effective and safe; however, they have not been compared directly. The objective of this study is to compare CRYO and C-RFA of the genicular nerve (GN) in terms of efficacy and safety profile in patients with Kellgren and Lawrence (KL) grade ≥ 3 OAK.
methodsThis single-centric, assessor-blinded, randomized, parallel-group, non-inferiority study will include 80 patients with KL grade ≥ 3 OAK. The patients with ≥ 50% pain relief on diagnostic block of three GNs will be randomized to one of the two groups, i.e., CRYO (n = 40) or C-RFA (n = 40). The three target GNs for the interventions will include: superior medial, superior lateral, and inferior medial. The primary outcome will be efficacy of CRYO or C-RFA at 2, 12, and 24 weeks post-procedure based on the 11-point Numerical Pain Rating Scale. The secondary outcomes will be functional improvement based on 12-item Oxford Knee Score and safety of both the procedures. The study is registered in the Clinical Trials Registry-India.
conclusionCRYO and C-RFA provide pain relief and improve functional outcome by preventing transmission of pain signals, though by distinct mechanisms. While C-RFA is an established treatment modality, recent evidence supports CRYO in patients with OAK. This study intends to demonstrate non-inferiority of CRYO against C-RFA, thereby supporting the use of CRYO as an additional treatment modality in patients with KL grade ≥ 3 OAK.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.