Trial reportAnesthesiology2025
Efficacy of Cryoneurolysis on Chronic Pain in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis: A Double-blinded Randomized Controlled Sham Trial.
Trial report in Anesthesiology, 2025. 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.
- Interventional Management of Pain with Cryoneurolysis: Expert Consensus Recommendations for Standardizing Patient Selection and Techniques Based on Delphi Process.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2026Article
- Technique and context matter in cryoneurolysis for knee osteoarthritis.Annals of joint · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe objective was to investigate whether cryoneurolysis was superior to sham in reducing pain intensity in patients with chronic knee osteoarthritis. The hypothesis was that cryoneurolysis is an effective and safe therapy to reduce chronic pain in patients with knee osteoarthritis.
methodsThe study was randomized, double blind, and sham controlled. A total of 87 patients with chronic knee osteoarthritis were randomized to either cryoneurolysis or a sham procedure, followed by an exercise program. The target nerves, anterior femoral cutaneous nerve and infrapatellar branch of the saphenous nerve were identified using transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, and cryoneurolysis was performed with ultrasound guidance. The primary outcome was the difference in average pain at 14 days after intervention between the cryoneurolysis and sham group.
resultsFor the intention-to-treat analysis, no difference was observed for the primary outcome (0.49; 95% CI, -0.3 to 1.2; P = 0.198). Both groups showed a significant reduction in pain scores 14 days after intervention (cryoneurolysis: -1.9; 95% CI, -2.4 to -1.3; and sham: -1.4; 95% CI, -1.9 to -0.8). At 6-month follow-up, a significant reduction in pain was observed in the cryoneurolysis group compared to the sham group (1.1; 95% CI, 0.3 to 1.9; P = 0.009). Cryoneurolysis was well tolerated, with minor, transient adverse effects.
conclusionsThis study did not show a clinically relevant reduction in pain after intervention comparing cryoneurolysis and sham. Further studies are needed.
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.