Which one is more effective for the clinical treatment of chronic pain in knee osteoarthritis: radiofrequency neurotomy of the genicular nerves or intra‐articular injection?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy of intra-articular injection and radiofrequency (RF) neurotomy of genicular nerves in patients with chronic knee osteoarthritis (OA) pain. METHODS: Seventy-three patients with knee OA were included in the study. Patients were randomly assigned to Group IA (intra-articular 2.5 mL of bupivacaine, 2.5 mg of morphine and 1 mL of betamethasone, 6 mL of fluid injection) or Group RF (RF neurotomy of the genicular nerves). The outcome measures included a pain scale (visual analog scale, VAS) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Index of Osteoarthritis. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was found between the two groups in baseline VAS-pain. In Group RF, a significant reduction was observed in VAS-pain at the first month (P < 0.001) and the third month (P < 0.001) in comparison to Group IA. Also in Group RF, a significant reduction was observed in WOMAC total scores in the first month (P < 0.001) in comparison to Group IA. CONCLUSION: This study is the first controlled study in the literature which compares RF genicular nerve to intra-articular injections. This study demonstrated that genicular nerve RF neurotomy is a safe and efficient treatment modality and provides functional improvement along with an analgesia in patients with chronic knee OA.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".