Genicular Nerve Radiofrequency Treatment for Chronic Knee Osteoarthritis Pain: A Systematic Review And Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Utilizing Image Guidance

Clicks: 10
ID: 319803
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #24 of 56 articles by views in regional anesthesia and pain medicine

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Genicular nerve radiofrequency (gRF) treatment is a widely used intervention for chronic pain from knee osteoarthritis (KOA). This systematic review and meta-analysis focuses on RCTs utilizing image guidance to address inconsistencies in previous reviews and provide higher-quality evidence. DESIGN, SETTING, AND METHODS: This study included RCTs that compared gRF techniques (conventional, cooled, pulsed, bipolar) to non-gRF treatments, including sham procedures, intra-articular injections, ozone therapy, and oral medications. Primary and secondary outcomes were changes in pain and total WOMAC scores at 3, 6, and 12 months post-gRF treatments. Subgroup analyses explored differences by lesion size, use of prognostic blocks, industry sponsorship, and study location. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed via I 2 statistics. RESULTS: Eleven RCTs with 868 knee osteoarthritis patients (435 gRF, 433 non-gRF) were included. At 3 months, gRF significantly reduced pain (SMD -1.65, 95% CI: -3.20 to -0.10, I 2 = 98%, P = 0.040), but not at 6 months or 12 months. Secondary analyses showed no significant differences in total WOMAC scores between the gRF and control groups at 3, 6, and 12 months. Subgroup analysis showed that industry-sponsored studies reported significant 3-month pain reduction, whereas non-sponsored studies did not. This effect was independent of study location. CONCLUSIONS: GRF provides short-term pain relief (up to 3 months) but neither functional improvement nor sustained pain reduction compared to non-gRF treatments. Our findings do not support the routine use of gRF for long-term chronic pain due to KOA.
Reference Key
openalex_W7167470624 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Yu-Ning Peng, Yu-Hsiang Peng, Hassan Ahad, Jay Karri, Scott Pritzlaff, SMA Alim, Steven P. Cohen, Ryan S. D’Souza, Ratan K. Banik
Journal regional anesthesia and pain medicine
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/pm/pnag084
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/pm/pnag084
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.