We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Anatomical Comparison of Radiofrequency Ablation Techniques for Sacroiliac Joint Pain.
Pain Medicine 2018 October 2
Objective: To compare the percentage of sacral lateral branches (LBs) that would be captured if lesions were created by seven current sacroiliac joint (SIJ) radiofrequency ablation (RFA) techniques: three monopolar and four bipolar.
Design: Cadaveric fluoroscopy study.
Setting: Anatomy and surgical skills laboratories.
Subjects: Forty cadaveric SIJs.
Methods: LBs were exposed, radiopaque wires were sutured to LBs, and anterior-posterior fluoroscopic images through the S1 superior endplate were obtained. Lesions that would be created by 17 versions of seven current SIJ RFA techniques were mapped on the fluoroscopic images. These 17 versions were compared: 1) percentage of LBs that would be captured; 2) percentage of SIJ specimens in which 100% of LBs would be captured; and 3) percentage of LBs that would not be captured at each level (S1-S4).
Results: Both the mean LB and 100% capture rates were greater for the bipolar techniques (93.4-99.7% and 62.5-97.5%, respectively) than for the monopolar techniques (49.6-99.1% and 2.5-92.5%, respectively) evaluated. For the bipolar techniques, 1.5-29.2% of LBs would not be captured at S1 and 0% at S2-S4 vs 0-29.2% at S1-S4 for the cooled monopolar techniques vs 36.9-100% at S1-S4 for the conventional monopolar technique.
Conclusions: The findings suggest that, if lesions were created, the RFA needle placement locations of the bipolar techniques evaluated may be capable of capturing all LBs, but those of the current monopolar techniques evaluated may not. Future in vivo imaging studies are required to compare the lesion morphology generated by different SIJ RFA techniques and correlate the findings with clinical outcomes.
Design: Cadaveric fluoroscopy study.
Setting: Anatomy and surgical skills laboratories.
Subjects: Forty cadaveric SIJs.
Methods: LBs were exposed, radiopaque wires were sutured to LBs, and anterior-posterior fluoroscopic images through the S1 superior endplate were obtained. Lesions that would be created by 17 versions of seven current SIJ RFA techniques were mapped on the fluoroscopic images. These 17 versions were compared: 1) percentage of LBs that would be captured; 2) percentage of SIJ specimens in which 100% of LBs would be captured; and 3) percentage of LBs that would not be captured at each level (S1-S4).
Results: Both the mean LB and 100% capture rates were greater for the bipolar techniques (93.4-99.7% and 62.5-97.5%, respectively) than for the monopolar techniques (49.6-99.1% and 2.5-92.5%, respectively) evaluated. For the bipolar techniques, 1.5-29.2% of LBs would not be captured at S1 and 0% at S2-S4 vs 0-29.2% at S1-S4 for the cooled monopolar techniques vs 36.9-100% at S1-S4 for the conventional monopolar technique.
Conclusions: The findings suggest that, if lesions were created, the RFA needle placement locations of the bipolar techniques evaluated may be capable of capturing all LBs, but those of the current monopolar techniques evaluated may not. Future in vivo imaging studies are required to compare the lesion morphology generated by different SIJ RFA techniques and correlate the findings with clinical outcomes.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app