Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42552280›Full record

ReviewCurrent pain and headache reports2026

Phenol Neurolysis for Refractory Non-Cancer Chronic Pain: Re-Evaluating an Established Technique in Modern Pain Practice.

Rodrigo Díez-Tafur, Flor Montenegro Torres, María José Quiroga Reategui

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current pain and headache reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Rodrigo Díez-TafurPain Medicine Unit, Centro MDRS: Sports, Spine & Pain - Clínica Angloamericana, Avenida Emilio Cavenecia 151 of. 101, Miraflores, Lima, 15073, Perú. rodrigo.dieztafur@mail.mcgill.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0681-8941
Flor Montenegro TorresPain Medicine Unit, Centro MDRS: Sports, Spine & Pain - Clínica Angloamericana, Avenida Emilio Cavenecia 151 of. 101, Miraflores, Lima, 15073, Perú.
María José Quiroga ReateguiPain Medicine Unit, Centro MDRS: Sports, Spine & Pain - Clínica Angloamericana, Avenida Emilio Cavenecia 151 of. 101, Miraflores, Lima, 15073, Perú.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewTo critically reevaluate the role of phenol neurolysis in the management of refractory chronic non-cancer pain, focusing on mechanisms of action, formulations, clinical indications, procedural techniques, therapeutic efficacy, safety profile, economic considerations, and its relevance in the era of modern interventional pain therapies. RECENT

findingsEmerging evidence suggests that phenol neurolysis may provide meaningful analgesia and functional improvement in selected patients with refractory non-cancer pain, including spasticity, trigeminal neuralgia, osteoarthritis, coccydynia, and sympathetically maintained pain. However, available studies remain limited, heterogeneous, and largely observational, with substantial variability in concentrations, indications, and techniques. The overall quality of evidence is predominantly low to moderate. Despite declining use in contemporary practice, phenol neurolysis remains a potentially valuable option in selected clinical scenarios, particularly in resource-constrained settings. Significant knowledge gaps and lack of procedural standardization underscore the need for high-quality prospective research to better define its role in modern pain management.

Indexed as

Chronic PainIntractable PainNerve BlockPain ManagementPhenolHumansPhenolChronic painNeurolysisNon-cancer pain (MeSH/NLM)Pain managementPhenolRefractory pain

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.