Radiofrequency Procedures for the Treatment of Symptomatic Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of radiofrequency (RF) ablation and neuromodulation modalities for knee osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: The Pubmed, Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to August 2018. All comparative and noncomparative studies that reported clinical outcome measures and adverse events related to RF modalities for knee OA were included. Pain scores, physical function measures, quality of life (QOL), patient satisfaction, and adverse events for three months and beyond of postprocedure follow-up were analyzed qualitatively. RESULTS: Thirty-three studies, including 13 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), two nonrandomized comparative studies, and 18 noncomparative cohort studies, were identified, with 1,512 patients (mean age = 64.3 years, 32.5% males). All 33 studies were considered to be of moderate or high methodological quality. All 33/33 (100%) studies reported alleviation of OA-related knee pain from baseline until three to 12 months with RF modalities, with six comparative studies reporting 194/296 (65.5%) and 29/150 (19.3%) RF and control patients achieving >50% pain relief, respectively. Three of the 33 studies reported QOL, with three of three studies (100%) achieving improvements in disease-specific QOL from baseline until three to 12 months. Twenty-eight of the 33 studies reported functional outcomes, with 27/28 (96%) studies obtaining enhanced functionality from baseline up until three to 12 months. Ten of the 33 studies reported patient satisfaction, with eight of 10 studies (80%) indicating that patients were significantly satisfied after RF procedures, and from these eight studies, four were comparative studies that indicated that 86/154 (56%) and 33/104 (32%) RF and control patients were extremely satisfied or satisfied, respectively. Regarding adverse events (AEs), 29 of the 33 studies reported AEs, with 20/29 (69%) studies indicating no AEs related to the RF modalities and the remaining nine studies only indicating minor localized AEs. Twenty-nine of the 33 studies indicated no serious knee-related AEs pertaining to RF modalities. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence substantiates that RF modalities for knee OA potentially improve pain, functionality, and disease-specific QOL for up to three to 12 months with minimal localized complications. This suggests that RF modalities are perhaps an effective adjunct therapy for patients with knee OA who are unresponsive to conservative therapies. Further RCTs with larger sample sizes and long-term follow-up that directly compare the three primary RF modalities are warranted to confirm the clinical efficaciousness and superiority of these RF modalities for 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".