Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 8, 2025
Author Spotlight: Minimally Invasive Ultrasound-Guided Acupotomy in Knee Osteoarthritis Treatment
Published on: April 26, 2024
High-Voltage Intraarticular Pulsed Radiofrequency for Chronic Knee Pain Treatment: A Single-Center Retrospective
Tao Hong1, Shimeng Wang2, Yuanyuan Ding1
1Department of Pain Management, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Background:
Intraarticular pulsed radiofrequency (IAPRF) for the treatment of painful knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a less invasive treatment method. It has fewer adverse effects and can quickly reduce KOA-related pain and improve knee joint dysfunction.
Objectives:
We compared the effectiveness of high- and low-voltage IAPRF for the treatment of chronic knee pain.
Study Design:
Retrospective comparative study design.
Setting:
This study took place at Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University.
Methods:
A total of 57 patients with KOA who were hospitalized between July 2018 and July 2019 were randomly allocated into the high-voltage (n = 29) and low-voltage (n = 28) IAPRF groups. IAPRF was performed under the guidance of computed tomography (CT). Numeric Rating Scale (NRS-11), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), degree of pain relief, global perceived effect, and side effects at baseline and 1 week, 2 weeks, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after the procedure were recorded and analyzed.
Results:
NRS-11 scores decreased significantly in both groups after the procedure, but gradually increased after the 6-month follow-up period. There was a significant difference in NRS-11 scores between the 2 groups at all follow-up periods postprocedure. OKS were similar between the 2 groups. Patients with pain relief rate 50% or greater at 1, 3, and 6 months after the procedure accounted for 72.41%, 72.41%, and 55.17% in the high-voltage group, and 46.43%, 46.43%, and 28.57% in the low-voltage group, respectively. The difference between the 2 groups was statistically significant. No significant adverse reactions were observed in the 2 groups, however, patient satisfaction in the high-voltage group was significantly higher compared with patients in the low-voltage group.
Limitations:
This study was a single-center retrospective study with a relatively small sample cohort and short follow-up period.
Conclusions:
CT-guided high-voltage IAPRF is more beneficial in reducing knee pain and improving knee function compared with low-voltage IAPRF. In addition, patients who received high-voltage IAPRF were more satisfied with their treatment.
