Cervical Pain Clinical Trial
Official title:
The Effectiveness and Procedural Characteristics of the Trident Multi-tined Cannula for Cervical Medial Branch Radiofrequency Ablation Compared to the Conventional Cannula; A Multi-site, Single Blinded, Randomized Controlled Trial
NCT number | NCT05424198 |
Other study ID # | IRB 143800 |
Secondary ID | |
Status | Recruiting |
Phase | N/A |
First received | |
Last updated | |
Start date | April 26, 2023 |
Est. completion date | May 1, 2026 |
Cervical medial branch radiofrequency ablation (CMBRFA) is an effective treatment for cervical facet pain. The efficacy of CMBRFA was proven by studies published in the late 1990's and early 2000's. Patients were selected by a strict, labor-intensive placebo-controlled, diagnostic block protocol and were treated using a conventional monopolar cannula that was positioned parallel to the medial branch, two to three lesions per medial branch nerve and both sagittal and oblique passes. Since the original CMBRFA publications, patient selection for CMBRFA is less strict, and new RFA cannulae have been developed to improve efficiency and safety while maintaining a large ablative lesion. Current clinical patient selection criteria for CMBRFA tend to be more relaxed than described in early research studies. However, subsequent research has shown that when selection criteria are too relaxed, outcomes are poorer. A recent cross-sectional study reported that when CMBRFA is done in patients selected by >80% pain improvement after dual medial branch blocks, outcomes are similar to patients selected with a stricter selection protocol (100% pain relief) similar to the original CMBRFA studies. Although, the cross-sectional study suggests an appropriate selection criteria, it has not been used in any prospective studies. The Trident multi-tined cannula is a recent technology that produces a large ablative lesion distal to the triple-tined tip. This design allows a perpendicular/lateral approach to CMBRFA and only requires a single lesion at each medial branch. This differs from the conventional cannula, which produces it's most extensive ablative lesion along the cannula with minimal distal projection. As a result, it requires a parallel approach with multiple burn cycles at the same medial branch. The perpendicular approach with Trident and single lesion cycle at each medial branch are appealing for safety purposes and efficiency however, it's efficacy has not been directly compared to the standard conventional cannula. Problem: There are no randomized controlled trials comparing novel technologies like Trident cannula to the previously studied conventional cannula in patients selected with a more practical selection criteria. Purpose: To compared procedural characteristics, pain, and disability outcomes of CMBRFA using either a Trident or conventional cannula in patients with confirmed facet mediated pain (defined by ≥80% symptom reduction after dual medial branch block). Central Hypothesis: Trident cannula during CMBRFA will result in noninferior improvements in pain and function compared to conventional cannula but will significantly reduce procedural discomfort, time and radiation exposure. Specific Aims: 1. Determine the proportion of patients with a successful pain response (defined as ≥50% improvement in index pain) to Trident (T-CMBRFA) versus conventional (C-CMBRFA) at 3, 6, and 12 months. 2. Determine the proportion of patients with a successful functional response (defined as ≥10% reduction on neck disability index [NDI]) to T-CMBRFA versus C-CMBRFA at 3, 6, and 12 months. 3. Determine the proportion of patients with a successful perception of improvement (defined as a score ≥6 on the Patient Global Impression of Change [PGIC]) to T-CMBRFA versus C-CMBRFA at 3, 6, and 12 months.
Status | Recruiting |
Enrollment | 80 |
Est. completion date | May 1, 2026 |
Est. primary completion date | May 1, 2025 |
Accepts healthy volunteers | No |
Gender | All |
Age group | 18 Years and older |
Eligibility | Inclusion Criteria: 1. Adult patient aged =18 capable of understanding and providing consent in English and capable of complying with the outcome instruments used. 2. Axial (non-radicular) neck pain for at least 3 months. 3. 7-day average numeric pain rating score (NRS) for neck pain of 4/10 or greater at baseline evaluation. 4. *Positive responses to dual diagnostic MBB blocks using 0.5mL of lidocaine and bupivacaine, on respective encounters on separate days, at each of the appropriate MBBs. - Levels selected for diagnostic procedures will be determined by the treating physician based on the overall clinical picture including the location of pain, pain referral patterns, physical examination and imaging findings. The procedural techniques of all MBB blocks will be performed according to Spine Intervention Society guidelines.(14) A pain diary with appropriate diagnostic categories of relief will be provided (100% relief, 80-99% relief, etc.), will be provided. In order to qualify as a positive block, the subject must experience relief lasting at least one hour with lidocaine and two hours with bupivacaine. Exclusion Criteria: 1. Those receiving remuneration for their pain treatment (e.g. disability, worker's compensation, auto injury in litigation or pending litigation). 2. The patient is incarcerated. 3. Those unable to read English and complete the assessment instruments. 4. Allergy to contrast media or local anesthetics. 5. Chronic widespread pain or somatoform disorder (e.g. fibromyalgia). 6. Prior cervical medial branch radiofrequency neurotomy. 7. Severe clinical depression or psychotic features. 8. Possible pregnancy or other reason that precludes the use of fluoroscopy. 9. Daily chronic opiate use of >50 morphine equivalents. 10. Presence of pacemaker of neurostimulator. 11. Systemic infection at time of procedure. 12. Uncontrolled bleeding diathesis. 13. Requirement of IV procedural sedation. |
Country | Name | City | State |
---|---|---|---|
United States | University of Utah Farmington Health Center | Farmington | Utah |
United States | University of Utah Orthopaedic Center | Salt Lake City | Utah |
United States | University of Utah South Jordan Health Center | South Jordan | Utah |
Lead Sponsor | Collaborator |
---|---|
University of Utah |
United States,
Ayearst L, Harsanyi Z, Michalko KJ. The Pain and Sleep Questionnaire three-item index (PSQ-3): a reliable and valid measure of the impact of pain on sleep in chronic nonmalignant pain of various etiologies. Pain Res Manag. 2012 Jul-Aug;17(4):281-90. doi: 10.1155/2012/635967. — View Citation
Barnsley L. Percutaneous radiofrequency neurotomy for chronic neck pain: outcomes in a series of consecutive patients. Pain Med. 2005 Jul-Aug;6(4):282-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2005.00047.x. — View Citation
Bogduk N E. International Spine Intervention Society. Cervical medial branch thermal radiofrequency neurotomy. Practice Guidelines: Spinal Diagnostic and Treatment Procedures, 2nd edition. 2013. 165-217 p.
Bogduk N, Kennedy DJ, Vorobeychik Y, Engel A. Guidelines for Composing and Assessing a Paper on Treatment of Pain. Pain Med. 2017 Nov 1;18(11):2096-2104. doi: 10.1093/pm/pnx121. — View Citation
Bogduk N. The clinical anatomy of the cervical dorsal rami. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1982 Jul-Aug;7(4):319-30. doi: 10.1097/00007632-198207000-00001. — View Citation
Chow JTY, Turkstra TP, Yim E, Jones PM. Sample size calculations for randomized clinical trials published in anesthesiology journals: a comparison of 2010 versus 2016. Can J Anaesth. 2018 Jun;65(6):611-618. doi: 10.1007/s12630-018-1109-z. Epub 2018 Mar 22. — View Citation
Cohen SP, Strassels SA, Kurihara C, Lesnick IK, Hanling SR, Griffith SR, Buckenmaier CC 3rd, Nguyen C. Does sensory stimulation threshold affect lumbar facet radiofrequency denervation outcomes? A prospective clinical correlational study. Anesth Analg. 2011 Nov;113(5):1233-41. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e31822dd379. Epub 2011 Sep 14. — View Citation
Cosman ER Jr, Dolensky JR, Hoffman RA. Factors that affect radiofrequency heat lesion size. Pain Med. 2014 Dec;15(12):2020-36. doi: 10.1111/pme.12566. Epub 2014 Oct 14. — View Citation
Ebraheim NA, Haman ST, Xu R, Yeasting RA. The anatomic location of the dorsal ramus of the cervical nerve and its relation to the superior articular process of the lateral mass. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1998 Sep 15;23(18):1968-71. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199809150-00009. — View Citation
Finlayson RJ, Thonnagith A, Elgueta MF, Perez J, Etheridge JB, Tran DQ. Ultrasound-Guided Cervical Medial Branch Radiofrequency Neurotomy: Can Multitined Deployment Cannulae Be the Solution? Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2017 Jan/Feb;42(1):45-51. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0000000000000506. — View Citation
Harden RN, Weinland SR, Remble TA, Houle TT, Colio S, Steedman S, Kee WG; American Pain Society Physicians. Medication Quantification Scale Version III: update in medication classes and revised detriment weights by survey of American Pain Society Physicians. J Pain. 2005 Jun;6(6):364-71. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2005.01.350. — View Citation
Julious SA. Sample sizes for clinical trials with normal data. Stat Med. 2004 Jun 30;23(12):1921-86. doi: 10.1002/sim.1783. — View Citation
Kovacs FM, Abraira V, Royuela A, Corcoll J, Alegre L, Tomas M, Mir MA, Cano A, Muriel A, Zamora J, Del Real MT, Gestoso M, Mufraggi N; Spanish Back Pain Research Network. Minimum detectable and minimal clinically important changes for pain in patients with nonspecific neck pain. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2008 Apr 10;9:43. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-9-43. — View Citation
Lord SM, Barnsley L, Wallis BJ, McDonald GJ, Bogduk N. Percutaneous radio-frequency neurotomy for chronic cervical zygapophyseal-joint pain. N Engl J Med. 1996 Dec 5;335(23):1721-6. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199612053352302. — View Citation
Luedtke K, Basener A, Bedei S, Castien R, Chaibi A, Falla D, Fernandez-de-Las-Penas C, Gustafsson M, Hall T, Jull G, Kropp P, Madsen BK, Schaefer B, Seng E, Steen C, Tuchin P, von Piekartz H, Wollesen B. Outcome measures for assessing the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions in frequent episodic or chronic migraine: a Delphi study. BMJ Open. 2020 Feb 12;10(2):e029855. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-029855. — View Citation
McDonald GJ, Lord SM, Bogduk N. Long-term follow-up of patients treated with cervical radiofrequency neurotomy for chronic neck pain. Neurosurgery. 1999 Jul;45(1):61-7; discussion 67-8. doi: 10.1097/00006123-199907000-00015. — View Citation
Pool JJ, Ostelo RW, Hoving JL, Bouter LM, de Vet HC. Minimal clinically important change of the Neck Disability Index and the Numerical Rating Scale for patients with neck pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007 Dec 15;32(26):3047-51. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31815cf75b. — View Citation
Walker E, Nowacki AS. Understanding equivalence and noninferiority testing. J Gen Intern Med. 2011 Feb;26(2):192-6. doi: 10.1007/s11606-010-1513-8. Epub 2010 Sep 21. — View Citation
* Note: There are 18 references in all — Click here to view all references
Type | Measure | Description | Time frame | Safety issue |
---|---|---|---|---|
Primary | Post Procedure Pain Response | Proportion of patients with a successful pain response (defined as =50% improvement in index pain) to Trident (T-CMBRFA) versus conventional (C-CMBRFA) | 3, 6, and 12 months | |
Secondary | Post Procedure Disability Response | The proportion of patients with a successful functional response (defined as = 10% reduction on neck disability index [NDI]) to T-CMBRFA versus C-CMBRFA | 3, 6, and 12 months | |
Secondary | Post Procedure Patient Impression of Change | The proportion of patients with a successful perception of improvement (defined as a score =6 on the Patient Global Impression of Change [PGIC]) to T-CMBRFA versus C-CMBRFA | 3, 6, and 12 months | |
Secondary | Procedural Radiation Dose | Differences in procedural patient radiation dose during T-CMBRFA versus C-CMBRFA. | After procedure | |
Secondary | Procedure discomfort | Differences in procedural patient discomfort during T-CMBRFA versus C-CMBRFA. | After procedure | |
Secondary | Procedure time | Differences in procedural time during T-CMBRFA versus C-CMBRFA. | After procedure |
Status | Clinical Trial | Phase | |
---|---|---|---|
Completed |
NCT05427097 -
Thermal Energy in the Treatment of Cervicogenic Dizziness
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT01421641 -
Tenaculum Pain Control Study
|
Phase 4 | |
Not yet recruiting |
NCT05914129 -
Efficacy of Osteopathic Visceral Treatment in Patients With Chronic Neck Pain
|
N/A | |
Not yet recruiting |
NCT05376163 -
Validity of Headache Disability Index
|
||
Completed |
NCT02979041 -
VR Training for Pilots With Neck Pain
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT02868359 -
PROs in Chronic Cervical Pain Patients With Accompanying Upper Limb Radiating Pain Treated With Pregabalin
|
||
Completed |
NCT00551980 -
The Efficacy of a Cognitive and Physical Intervention to Reduce Head and Muscle Pain in a Working Community
|
Phase 3 | |
Completed |
NCT03670719 -
Effectiveness of Manual Therapy and Exercise vs Exercise in Subjects With Chronic Cervical Pain and Upper Cervical Spine Dysfunction
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT04572113 -
Comparison of Cervical Motion Restriction and Interface Pressure Between Two Cervical Collars
|
||
Completed |
NCT04270968 -
Shock Wave Therapy On Cervical Pain Following Neck Dissection Surgery
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT05474612 -
Comparison of Kinesiology Taping and Instrument Assisted Soft Tissue Mobilization in Cervicogenic Headache
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT05191043 -
Effects of Kinesio Taping in Addition to Routine Physical Therapy on Pain, Range of Motion and Functional Disability in Patients With Upper Cross Syndrome
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT03745469 -
The Effect of Smartphone Use Duration in Patients With Chronic Mechanical Neck Pain.
|
||
Completed |
NCT05125250 -
Effects of Vestibular Exercises and Motor Control in Cervicogenic Dizziness
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT05399953 -
Investigation of Effects of Physiotherapy Interventions on Mechanical Properties of Muscle in Head and Neck Cancer
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT03331653 -
Effectiveness of Dry Needling and Ischemic Compression in Sternocleidomastoid, on Cervical Motor Control in Patients With Cervical Pain.
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT05619354 -
Validity and Reliability of the Dutch HDI
|
||
Completed |
NCT06298747 -
Ultrasound-guided Selective Cervical Root Pulsed Radiofrequency Therapy in Patients With Cervical Radicular Pain
|
||
Completed |
NCT05338788 -
Balance Performance in Dual Task in Patients With Cervical Disc Herniation Related Chronic Neck Pain:a Comparative Study
|
||
Completed |
NCT05785104 -
Effect of Muscle Energy Technique Versus Myofascial Release on Cervical and Lumbar Pain
|
N/A |