
==== Front
Pain Ther
Pain Ther
Pain and Therapy
2193-8237
2193-651X
Springer Healthcare Cheshire

39068636
639
10.1007/s40122-024-00639-w
Original Research
Transforaminal Steroid Injection After Dorsal Root Ganglion Pulsed Radiofrequency (DRG-PRF): Impact on Pain Intensity and Disability
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5228-3733
Leoni Matteo Luigi Giuseppe matteolg.leoni@gmail.com

12
Micheli Fabrizio 2
Abbott David Michael 3
Cascella Marco 4
Varrassi Giustino 5
Sansone Pasquale 6
Gazzeri Roberto 7
Rocco Monica 1
Mercieri Marco 1
1 https://ror.org/02be6w209 grid.7841.a Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
2 https://ror.org/0403w5x31 grid.413861.9 Unit of Interventional Pain Management, Guglielmo da Saliceto Hospital, Piacenza, Italy
3 https://ror.org/00s6t1f81 grid.8982.b 0000 0004 1762 5736 Department of Surgical, Pediatric and Diagnostic Sciences, University of Pavia, 27100 Pavia, PV Italy
4 https://ror.org/0192m2k53 grid.11780.3f 0000 0004 1937 0335 Department of Medicine, Surgery and Dentistry, University of Salerno, 84081 Baronissi, Italy
5 Paolo Procacci Foundation, 00193 Rome, Italy
6 https://ror.org/02kqnpp86 grid.9841.4 0000 0001 2200 8888 Department of Woman, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, University of Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”, 81100 Naples, Italy
7 https://ror.org/04pr9pz75 grid.415032.1 0000 0004 1756 8479 Pain Therapy Unit, San Giovanni Addolorata Hospital, 00184 Rome, Italy
28 7 2024
28 7 2024
10 2024
13 5 12711285
9 5 2024
9 7 2024
© The Author(s) 2024
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
Introduction

Dorsal root ganglion pulsed radiofrequency (DRG-PRF) is frequently used for the treatment of chronic lumbar radicular pain with good outcomes in terms of pain management. Transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) is often administered immediately after DRG-PRF to increase the anti-inflammatory effects, but support for the synergic mechanism is lacking in the literature. The aim of this study was to investigate the potential role of TFESI immediately after DRG-PRF and its possible role on pain intensity and patient disability.

Methods

A database of patients who underwent DRG-PRF with or without TFESI immediately after DRG-PRF was retrospectively analysed; propensity score matching was applied to the analysis to reduce possible bias. Pain intensity (numerical rating scale [NRS]) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) were recorded pre-operatively and at the 1- and 3-month follow-up in the two groups of patients.

Results

A total of 252 patients were included in this retrospective analysis, 126 patients in the DRG-PRF + TFESI group and 126 patients in the DRG-PRF group after propensity score matching. Both groups displayed a significant reduction in pain intensity (NRS score reduction; p < 0.0001) and improvement in the ODI (p < 0.0001) from baseline at the 3-month follow-up. Interestingly, the use of TFESI after DRG-PRF was not associated with any clinical benefit as no difference in NRS and ODI was found between the two groups at the 1- and 3-month follow-ups.

Conclusions

Our study revealed a significant pain reduction and disability improvement after DRG-PRF in patients with lumbar radicular pain. Interestingly, no positive role of TFESI immediately after DRG-PRF was observed. These findings suggest that DRG-PRF provides substantial pain relief, and no added benefit is obtained with subsequent steroid injection. Future prospective studies with expanded follow-up periods are needed to confirm these findings.

Keywords

Low back pain
Radicular pain
Pulsed radiofrequency
Dorsal root ganglion
Transforaminal
Steroid injection
issue-copyright-statement© Springer Healthcare Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2024
==== Body
pmcKey Summary Points

Why carry out this study?	
Transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) is frequently administered immediately after dorsal root ganglion pulsed radiofrequency (DRG-PRF) to increase the anti-inflammatory effects of PRF	
However, this supposed synergic mechanism has not been confirmed and no definitive results have supported this strategy	
The aim of this study was to investigate the potential role of TFESI immediately after DRG-PRF and its possible effects on pain intensity and patient disability	
What was learned from the study?	
DRG-PRF effectively reduces pain and improves disability in patients with chronic lumbar radicular pain	
TFESI administered immediately after DRG-PRF does not demonstrate additional clinical benefits in terms of pain intensity or patient disability	
Propensity score matching ensures reduced bias in comparing the outcomes of DRG-PRF alone versus DRG-PRF with TFESI, enhancing the reliability of the study findings	
Prospective studies with longer follow-up periods are warranted to validate these findings and further explore the efficacy of DRG-PRF and TFESI in managing lumbar radicular pain	

Introduction

Chronic spinal pain is a leading cause of disability among adults worldwide with detrimental effects on quality of life and burdensome costs for healthcare systems [1]. Lumbar disc herniations and degenerative spine conditions (stenosis, osteoarthritis, listhesis, scoliosis and vertebral compression fractures) are common conditions involved in low back pain and lumbosacral radicular pain [2]. The main components of the pathophysiology of chronic radicular pain are nerve root compression, inflammation and glial activation [3, 4]. Transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) is a common interventional option for the treatment of these conditions [5], and although a significant pain reduction has been reported by many published studies with the use of TFESI [6, 7], the efficacy is generally time-dependent and effectiveness in reducing radicular pain is often transient [8, 9].

In the last 25 years, pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) has emerged as a percutaneous, minimally invasive technique that uses an electrical current to achieve medium to long-term pain reduction, especially for neuropathic pain [10]. The procedure was originally described in 1998 for radicular lumbar pain but its application has since been been expanded to include different pain conditions [11].

The dorsal root ganglion (DRG) is a common target of PRF when the aim is to effectively control lumbar radicular pain [12–17]. This technique relies on the intermittent administration of high-frequency, short-duration current at a temperature below 42 °C to induce an electrical neuromodulation without structural damage [18]. The PRF current comprises alternatively repeated electromagnetic waves with a frequency of 500 kHz and pulse width of 20 ms with 480 ms resting phase [19].

Recently, different therapeutic mechanisms have been reported to explain PRF-induced pain relief. The C-fiber long-term depression was the first described mechanism of pain signalling inhibition [20]. Many other mechanisms were subsequently reported, including microglia downregulation [21], increased levels of endogenous opioid messenger RNA [22], enhancement of noradrenergic and serotonergic descending pain inhibitory pathways [23] and microscopic damages of membranes, mitochondria, microfilaments and microtubules [24]. Recent studies have highlighted the anti-inflammatory effects of PRF as a result of a reduction of proinflammatory cytokines [25, 26], along with an increase of nestin and matrix metalloproteinase-2 expression at the level of the DRG [27].

TFESI is frequently used immediately after DRG-PRF to increase the anti-inflammatory effects of PRF [28]. However, the supposed synergic mechanism has not been confirmed, and no definitive results have supported this strategy. Notably, steroid injections can cause possible severe adverse effects, such as an increase in blood sugar levels, especially in patients with diabetes [29], epidural lipomatosis, spinal cord infarct, menstrual changes, adrenal suppression, Cushing’s syndrome, osteoporosis and steroid myopathy [30, 31].

The aim of this study was to investigate the potential role of TFESI immediately after DRG-PRF and its possible effects on pain intensity and patient disability.

Methods

Study Population

The data of consecutive patients with low back pain and radicular pain who underwent DRG-PRF at our Interventional and Surgical Pain Centre, Guglielmo da Saliceto Hospital, Piacenza, Italy, from January 2019 to December 2021 was entered into a retrospective database specifically created for this study. This study was approved by the local Ethics Committee (747/2023/DISP/AUSLPC) and performed in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki.

The inclusion criteria consisted of patients with chronic low back pain, radicular pain, no response to medical and physical treatments and with transitory response to previous epidural or transforaminal steroid injections. Patients with incomplete clinical data and those who were pregnant were not entered into the database. Patients with localized infection, haemorrhagic diathesis, spinal pathologies (e.g. tumours), vertebral fractures, instability, central canal stenosis, clinical signs of motor palsy, uncontrolled diabetes, heart failure or comorbid psychiatric condition were not included.

Data Collection

Electronic medical records were reviewed to collect demographic and clinical data. Pre- and intra-operative variables such as age, gender, body mass index (BMI), pain duration, level of DRG-PRF, single or dual level (L4L5 + L5S1) DRG-PRF, pain intensity (numerical rating scale [NRS]) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) were collected. The ODI score was calculated from a 10-item questionnaire to assess patients’ pain and its impact on daily life activities. This score ranges from minimal disability (0–20), moderate disability (21–40), severe disability (41–60), crippled (61–80) and bed-bound (81–100).

Due to the limited sample size, patients who underwent lumbar (L) spine DRG-PRF at L1, L2 and L3 were not included in the present study. NRS and ODI were collected at 1 and 3 months after DRG-PRF to evaluate the outcome of the procedure. All of the included patients underwent a previous transforaminal injection with lidocaine 1% to confirm radicular involvement. The last transforaminal injection was performed at least 1 month prior to DRG-PRF.

DRG-PRF Procedure

Patients were placed in the prone position with a pillow under the lower abdomen to reduce the physiological lordosis and to provide an easy approach to the intervertebral foramen. A conscious sedation with midazolam 0.05 mg/kg was induced and a 20G, 10-cm radiofrequency cannula with a 10-mm curved active tip was placed near the DRG under fluoroscopic guidance and strict aseptic conditions. Sedation was administered, if necessary, to certain patients to alleviate discomfort and anxiety associated with the procedure. We opted for a curved-tip needle to enhance needle mobility in cases of foraminal stenosis or bone hypertrophy, as its design allows it to be rotated for easier passage beneath the pedicle. However, these are merely personal impressions, and well-designed studies are necessary to confirm these considerations. The DRG is typically located in the dorsal-cranial quadrant of the intervertebral foramen on lateral fluoroscopic view and in the middle of the pedicle in the anteroposterior view [32]. The position of the cannula was confirmed by contrast injection to exclude a vascular placement and to evaluate the dye distribution along the medial and lateral border of the root and around the thecal sac [33]. The final location of the cannula was checked with sensory and motor stimulations. For the sensory stimulation at 50 Hz, a ≤ 0.4 V threshold was considered and confirmed by paraesthesia onset in the usual distribution of radicular pain. A motor stimulation (2 Hz) threshold greater than 1.5- to twofold the sensory threshold was considered appropriate to ensure the proper position of the cannula away from the ventral root and close to the DRG [34]. An impedance < 400 Ω was also required. The stylet of the cannula was consequently replaced by the radiofrequency probe and a PRF current was applied at 45 V with 20-ms pulse width and 2-Hz pulse rate for a duration of 360 s. The choice of a 360-s duration for PRF was based on prior studies demonstrating efficacy and safety within this timeframe [35–37]. Additionally, a recently published in vitro study suggests a potential effect of PRF on sensitized DRG neurons by reducing central sensitization biomarkers, such as phosphorylated extracellular signal-regulated kinase (pERK) and Ca2+ influx when PRF is performed at 2 Hz, 20 ms for 360 s [38]. Increasing the length of the PRF period ensures that each patient receives the precise amount of current necessary to achieve optimal therapeutic effects. However, it is important to note that no definitive protocol exists regarding the optimal PRF settings for clinical effectiveness. The maximum target temperature was 42 °C. However, as previously reported, it is possible for PRF to produce bursts of heat, causing the temperature to briefly exceed this limit around the radiofrequency electrodes by microseconds [39]. This brief increase in temperature is carefully controlled, and during these short periods, the machine will not deliver current to prevent any potential tissue damage while maintaining the therapeutic effects of the treatment.

Immediately after DRG-PRF, 1 ml of 1% lidocaine mixed with 40 mg triamcinolone was injected at the DRG level in the DRG-PRF + TFESI group. The decision to perform a TFESI immediately after DRG-PRF was based only on physicians’ choice and personal experience, and no randomization was done. This important issue was adequately addressed in the statistical analysis to avoid possible bias.

Statistical Analysis

Continuous variables are reported as the median and interquartile range (IQR) while categorical data are reported as the relative number and percentage. A propensity score was calculated using different statistical techniques with the use of frequentist and machine learning approaches. Logistic regression, random forest, generalized boosted model (GBM) and covariate balance propensity score (CBPS) were used to estimate propensity scores and for covariate weighting. The best overlap of the distribution of propensity scores (common support) was obtained with the logistic regression model, which was consequently used for the final analysis. Age, gender, BMI, pain duration, level of DRG-PRF, dual level DRG-PRF, basal NRS and basal ODI were considered as covariates. Different calipers (from 0.05 to 0.50) with 0.10 increase were tested for the matching. The standardized mean difference (SMD) was used as covariate balance measurement before and after propensity score matching. As previously recommended, a 0.10 SMD distance between covariates after the propensity score matching was the cut-off value [40]. The best propensity score matching was obtained with exact matching, caliper = 0.30, 1:1 ratio, with no replacement. Therefore, a database with matched patients was implemented, and the average treatment effect (ATE) related to NRS and ODI at 1 and 3 months after DRG-PRF was estimated with the Holm–Šídák correction for multiple comparisons. Statistical significance was set at a two-tailed p value < 0.05. R software v4.2.2 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria; www.r-project.org) was used for the analyses.

Results

A total of 158 patients in the DRG-PRF + TFESI group and 150 patients in the DRG-PRF group were initially considered for the study; of these 61 patients were excluded due to incomplete or missing data. After the propensity score matching, 126 patients in the DRG-PRF + TFESI group and 126 patients in the DRG-PRF group were matched. Consequently, 32 patients in the DRG-PRF + TFESI group and 24 patients in the DRG-PRF group were discarded due to covariate imbalance. As previously reported, the best overlap between propensity score values (common support) was obtained after logistic regression estimation (Fig. 1).Fig. 1 Best overlap of propensity score values (common support) across the two treatment groups (DRG-PRF and DRG-PRF + TFESI) after propensity score estimation with logistic regression. In addition to overlapping, the propensity score values have a similar balanced distribution. DRG dorsal root ganglion, PRF pulsed radiofrequency, TFESI transforaminal epidural steroid injection

All of the covariates were also adequately balanced after propensity score matching (Fig. 2). Ppatients’ covariates before and after propensity score weighting are summarized in Table 1. The median age of the included patients was 61 (IQR 52–69) years in the DRG-PRF + TFESI group and 62 (IQR 52–69) years in the DRG-PRF group (SMD - 0.0506). The majority of patients in each treatment group were female (59% and 61% in the DRG-PRF + TFESI and DRG-PRF group, respectively). The median BMI was 26.2 (IQR 23–28.4) kg/m2 in the DRG-PRF + TFESI group and 25 (IQR 23–28) kg/m2 in the DRG-PRF group (SMD 0.0147). Pain duration at the time of the intervention was 3.1 (IQR 1.5–4.7) years and 3.4 years (1.8–4.6 IQR) (SMD 0.0887), baseline NRS was 7.9 (IQR 7.6–8.4) and 8 (IQR 7.4–8.4 IQR) (SMD -0.0201) and ODI was 53 (IQR 49–57) and 53 (IQR 49–58) (SMD - 0.0542), in the DRG-PRF + TFESI and DRG-PRF groups, respectively. DRG-PRF was mainly performed at the L4-L5 level (57.3% of patients in the DRG-PRF + TFESI group, 58.2% in DRG-PRF group).Fig. 2 Covariates standardized mean differences before (unadjusted) and after (adjusted) propensity score matching. All covariates were below the cut-off value of 0.10. BMI Body mass index, DRG dorsal root ganglion, NRS numerical rating scale, PRF pulsed radiofrequency, ODI Oswestry disability index

Table 1 Baseline covariates of patients unweighted and weighted by propensity score

Baseline covariates	All patients (n = 308)	Unweighted	Propensity score weighted	
DRG-PRF + TFESI group (n = 150)	DRG-PRF group (n = 158)	SMD	DRG-PRF + TFESI group (n = 126)	DRG-PRF group (n = 126)	SMD	
Age, years	62 [53–73]	62 [51–73]	62 [55–71]	0.05	61 [53–70]	62 [52–74]	− 0.07	
Gender	0.12			0.03	
 Male	186 (60.4%)	86 (57.3%)	100 (63.3%)		50 (41%)	48 (39%)		
 Female	122 (39.6%)	64 (42.7%)	58 (36.7%)		72 (59%)	74 (61%)		
BMI, kg/m2	25.7 [23–28]	25.4 [23.5–27.8]	26.1 [22.5–28.4]	- 0.05	26.4 [23–28]	25.4 [23–27]	0.01	
Pain duration, years	3.2 [1.6–4.7]	3.4 [1.6–5]	3.1 [1.5–4.4]	0.20	3.1 [1.5–4.7]	3.2 [1.6–4.5]	0.02	
Level of DRG-PRF	0.06			− 0.03	
 L4-L5	181 (58.8%)	86 (57.3%)	95 (60%)		78 (62%)	76 (60%)		
 L5-S1	127 (41.2%)	64 (42.7%)	63 (40%)		48 (38%)	50 (40%)		
Two-level DRG-PRF	136 (44%)	75 (50%)	61 (39%)	0.14	56 (44.4%)	55 (43.6%)	0.02	
NRS basal	7.9 [7.5–8.4]	8 [7.6–8.4]	8 [7.3–8.4]	0.15	7.9 [7.5–8.4]	8 [7.4–8.4]	− 0.01	
ODI basal	53 [49–58]	53 [48–57]	54 [50–58]	- 0.26	53 [49–57]	53 [49–58]	0.006	
Values in table are presented as the median with the interquartile range in square brackets or as the number with the percentage in parentheses

BMI Body mass index, DRG dorsal root ganglion, L lumbar spine, L5-SI lumbosacral joint, NRS numerical rating scale, PRF pulsed radiofrequency, ODI Oswestry disability index, SMD standardized mean difference, TFESI transforaminal epidural steroid injection

No difference was found between baseline NRS (p = 0.87) and ODI values (p = 0.95) in the DRG-PRF and DRG-PRF + TFESI groups (p = 0.87). The ATE of the TFESI in the matched dataset revealed no difference between the DRG-PRF + TFESI and DRG-PRF groups in terms of NRS (NRS DRG-PRF + TFESI group: 4.3 ± 2.3; NRS DRG-PRF group: 4.4 ± 2.2; p = 0.88) and ODI (ODI DRG-PRF + TFESI group: 20 ± 7.9; ODI DRG-PRF group: 22 ± 7.8; p = 0.95) at the 1-month follow-up after DRG-PRF. The same results were obtained at the 3-month follow-up for NRS (NRS DRG-PRF + TFESI groups 4.8 ± 2.6; NRS DRG-PRF group: 4.2 ± 1.6; p = 0.80) and ODI improvement (ODI DRG-PRF + TFESI group: 27 ± 11; ODI DRG-PRF group: 27.6 ± 10; p = 0.96). Compared to baseline, the NRS was significantly reduced in both groups at the 1-month (p < 0.0001) and 3-month follow-ups (p < 0.0001), while the ODI score was similarly improved at the 1-month (p < 0.0001) and 3-month follow-ups (p < 0.0001) (Fig. 3).Fig. 3 Changes in pain scores (NRS) and disability index (ODI) during the follow-up, after DRG-PRF in the two groups (DRG-PRF and DRG-PRF + TFESI). DRG Dorsal root ganglion, NRS numerical rating scale, PRF pulsed radiofrequency, ODI Oswestry disability index, TFESI transforaminal epidural steroid injection

Discussion

In this study the use of TFESI (DRG-PRF + TFESI group) immediately after DRG-PRF was not associated with any clinically significant benefit. In fact, no difference in pain intensity (NRS scale) and disability index (ODI scale) was found at the 1- and 3-month follow-ups after DRG-PRF regardless of whether TFESI was administered or not. Significant pain relief and ODI improvement were maintained for up to 3 months in both groups.

DRG-PRF is frequently used with good results for the treatment of refractory radicular pain in patients with disc herniations, lumbar stenosis or persistent spinal pain syndrome (PSPS) [41]. The neuromodulatory and anti-inflammatory effects are the key elements of DRG-PRF but, as previously cited, other therapeutic mechanisms have been reported. Unfortunately, a complete description and a full understanding of all these complex mechanisms are still unavailable [42]. Various DRG-PRF protocols have been published, and analytical problems arise when attempting to compare different studies in a meta-analysis [43, 44]. In addition, DRG-PRF can be applied whether transforaminal or epidural, and the selection of the appropriate technique has not been adequately addressed. The same problems can be found in preclinical animal studies where the ideal voltage, number of cycles, pulse duration and optimal electrode distance are still far from being clarified [45]. All of these issues should be addressed in future studies for a better indication of the application of PRF for pain management. Indeed, the authors of a previously published review concluded that while there may be a convincing role of DRG-PRF for the treatment of cervical radicular pain, the evidence for PRF efficacy in treating lumbar radicular pain has yet to be confirmed by further studies, largely due to the absence of standardization of PRF parameters and enrolment criteria [46]. Moreover, as reported by Van Zundert et al., in the setting of a randomized controlled trial PRF treatment of the cervical DRG showed promising pain relief outcomes, indicating potential efficacy in patients with chronic cervical radicular pain [47].

In the present study, DRG-PRF was performed at 45 V with 20-ms pulse width and 2-Hz pulse rate, for a duration of 360 s, as previously suggested by many authors for the treatment of lumbar radicular pain [48–50]. High-voltage PRF has recently been proposed as a new method to increase the efficacy of the procedure and has been extensively studied for the treatment of herpes zoster-related pain [51–53]. However, the first encouraging results of high-voltage PRF [54, 55] were not confirmed in a recently published double-blind randomized control trial [56]. Taking all of these elements into account, high-voltage PRF cannot currently replace PRF performed at 45 V, and new evidence is needed to support the use of high-voltage PRF. Hopefully, the results of this ongoing trial will provide more information on this topic [57]. We believe that unresolved questions about the optimal “PRF dose”, including the voltage and duration of energy delivery, may significantly contribute to conflicting results in some studies and should be thoroughly addressed in future research. Finally, it is important to note that our results should be interpreted as strictly linked to the DRG-PRF protocol used and cannot be generalized.

TFESIs are frequently used with good short-term results for the management of radicular pain [58]. Steroids can reduce the inflammatory cascade by inhibiting the synthesis and the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines [59, 60]. When injected trasforaminally, they can potentially act at the anterior epidural space, where higher concentrations of substance P and glutamate are present [61, 62]. Adding steroids to PRF treatment has the potential to enhance the efficacy of this treatment by reducing inflammation. Steroids are known for their anti-inflammatory properties, which may complement PRF’s mechanism of action. However, as we previously noted, there are potential local (epidural lipomatosis and spinal cord infarct) and systemic (increase in blood sugar levels, menstrual changes, adrenal suppression, Cushing’s syndrome, osteoporosis and steroid myopathy) negative effects to consider. Moreover, steroids could attenuate some of the intended effects of PRF by altering the physiological response at the DRG level or potentially affecting the healing process.

A direct correlation with clinical improvement was found when an anterior epidural spread of the medication was obtained [63]. Although PRF was superior to TFESI and associated with positive results in previous studies for the treatment of radicular pain [64, 65], some authors have reported no difference in patients who received PRF or sham treatment [14, 66]. A recent retrospective study by Yang et al. [67] showed a 60% median pain reduction at the 1-month follow-up in patients with disk herniation, spinal stenosis or PSPS after DRG-PRF combined with TFESI, while no control group without steroids was considered. Our findings are in line with this publication. Indeed, our DRG-PRF + TFESI group showed a 46% NRS reduction at the 1-month follow-up. Unfortunately, it is not possible to fully compare the two studies since Yang et al. analysed only pain intensity and no ODI data were reported. Moreover, it is possible to argue that some patients in the Yang et al. study [67] underwent more than one DRG-PRF before the 1-month follow-up, since the number of DRG-PRF procedures performed is higher than the number of enrolled patients and DRG-PRF application at multiple spinal levels was not allowed by the protocol.

The same findings were reported in a subsequent study on the use of DRG-PRF with TFESI in 42 patients with different spine-related, pain-associated diagnoses [28]. If we consider only the lumbar spine group, DRG-PRF was able to reduce the NRS by 53% and 52% at the 1- and 3-month follow-ups, respectively. Notably, the authors were also able to show a 64% reduction in the NRS at 1 week after DRG-PRF, and a general decrease in the use of analgesics at 3 months after the procedure. Although this study highlights a number of important elements, such as the earlier follow-up and the decrease in analgesic use after DRG-PRF, the limited sample size and a possible covariate imbalance among the included patients prevents a possible comparison with our data and data from other studies.

To the contrary, in another published study PRF was considered to be an adjuvant treatment in conjunction with TFESI to increase the efficacy and the response rate of the injected steroid [14]. In this randomized controlled study, the authors reported a better pain relief at 2 and 3 months after DRG-PRF + TFESI when compared to TFESI alone while no difference was found at the 1-month follow-up, thus demonstrating a possible short-term role of TFESI. However, it is important to note that the results of this study should be interpreted cautiously since the primary outcome (pain reduction) was underpowered due to loss to follow-up and possible change of concomitant analgesic medication use, as allowed by the protocol. Consequently, is not possible to rule out that TFESI, PRF and analgesic medications can interact over the observed outcome.

In a retrospective study, 135 patients with lumbar radicular pain were treated with TFESI alone, DRG-PRF alone or TFESI combined with DRG-PRF [68]. All of the patients experienced an early analgesic effect, but only the second and third group obtained a more prolonged period of pain relief up to 3 months, as compared to patients treated with TFESI alone. Interestingly, at the 1-month follow-up, the lowest pain intensity and ODI improvements were obtained by patients in the TFESI + DRG-PRF group. In contrast, our data did not show any difference at the 1-month follow-up between the DRG-PRF + TFESI and DRG-PRF groups. This apparent difference could be related to the enrolled patients: in their retrospective study Ding et al. [68] enrolled a more heterogeneous group of patients with axial (non-radicular) or radicular chronic low back pain without a subgroup analysis, while we considered only selected patients with only radicular pain. Moreover, Ding et al. [68] also used 1 mg of vitamin B12 as an adjuvant in TFESI. Another study compared the use of TFESI in combination with DRG-PRF to TFESI alone in patients with lumbar or cervical radicular pain due to disc herniation [69]. Although pain intensity was significantly reduced in both groups after the treatment and the NRS score was lower in the DRG-PRF group, no statistically significant difference was found during the 12-week follow-up period.

To the best of our knowledge, no previously published studies comparing DRG-PRF + TFESI and DRG-PRF exist. The results of our study confirm that DRG-PRF does not require the injection of steroids to increase its efficacy for the treatment of radicular pain. DRG represents a key aspect due to its unique neuroanatomical structure and function on pain transmission [70, 71], along with a possible role as rescue therapy in patients with spinal cord stimulation failure [72]. All of these elements underline the crucial importance of DRG in radicular pain. This is the first study that directly compares pain reduction and ODI improvements in patients with radicular pain treated with DRG-PRF with and without TFESI immediately after PRF.

Although our study showed no clear advantages for the use of steroids after DRG-PRF in patients with radicular pain, additional prospective studies are needed to confirm these results and to expand on the clinical role of DRG-PRF in radicular pain. Moreover, it is important to consider our results as being strictly linked to the DRG-PRF protocol that was used. Another future area of research includes the development of well-constructed DRG-PRF outcome prediction models with a validation process. Indeed, as was recently outlined, different results can be obtained when a validation analysis is carried out to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the models [73, 74].

This study has several limitations. First, it is a single-centre, retrospective study. However, this potential weakness is counterbalanced by a significant sample size and the use of a propensity score-based analysis. In retrospective studies a wide distribution of observed covariates can be observed, and this can lead to biased estimates of the treatment’s effect. The propensity score has been used to reduce this bias. Indeed, as previously suggested, it could be considered comparable to a randomized trial [75, 76]. No data were collected regarding previous spine surgery; recently published data suggest that PRF is more effective in patients with disc herniation and spinal stenosis compared to patients with PSPS [12, 77]. However, these findings were not confirmed by Yang et al. [67]. We are not able to confirm these findings since data on the occurrence of previous lumbar surgery were collected in only a small number of patients and the required minimum sample size to be analysed and matched was not reached. Moreover, it was not possible to systematically collect the concomitant analgesic medications used by our enrolled patients. This is related to inaccuracies and failures in reporting these data during follow-up visits.

Other possible covariates, such as lifestyle habits (e.g. smoking, physical activity) or psychological factors (depression, anxiety and pain catastrophizing), were not studied, although all of these elements can certainly affect the observed results. Even if radicular pain was the leading symptom in these patients, it was not possible to rule out the presence of other minor contributing factors (e.g. facet or sacroiliac joints pain, muscular pain, postural imbalance) that could have influenced the DRG-PRF outcome.

In our study, only 1- and 3-month follow-up data were collected, and no data on early follow-up (e.g. 1 and 2 weeks) were available. This is related to our internal organization since patients are normally reassessed 1 month after an interventional procedure. Due to the retrospective nature of this study, these data cannot be documented. Consequently, a possible short-term benefit after steroid injection cannot be ruled out. Future studies with early follow-up, ranging from a few days post DRG-PRF to the first 2 weeks after treatment, are needed to clarify the potential role of steroid injection during the early period following DRG-PRF.

Conclusions

Our propensity scores matching analysis revealed a significant pain reduction and disability improvement after DRG-PRF in patients with lumbar radicular pain. Interestingly, no positive role of steroid injection immediately after DRG-PRF was observed. These findings would suggest that DRG-PRF does not require the injection of steroids to increase its efficacy. Future prospective studies with earlier and longer follow-up are needed to confirm our findings.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank all the residents, nurses and radiologic technologists involved in the management of these patients.

Medical Writing/Editorial Assistance

The authors thank John Shaw, supervised by David Michael Abbot, for English revision and editorial assistance.

Author Contributions

Matteo Luigi Giuseppe Leoni, Fabrizio Micheli collected the data. Matteo Luigi Giuseppe Leoni performed the statistical analysis. Matteo Luigi Giuseppe Leoni, David Michael Abbott and Marco Mercieri drafted the manuscript. David Michael Abbott, Marco Cascella, Giustino Varrassi, Pasquale Sansone, Roberto Gazzeri, Monica Rocco revised the final manuscript and contributed substantially to the study design.

Funding

No funding was provided for this study from any source and no financial benefits were provided to the authors. No previous presentation of the research, manuscript, or abstract in any form has occurred.

Data Availability

The dataset used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Declarations

Conflict of Interest

All the authors (Matteo Luigi Giuseppe Leoni, Fabrizio Micheli, David Michael Abbott, Marco Cascella, Giustino Varrassi, Pasquale Sansone, Roberto Gazzeri, Monica Rocco and Marco Mercieri) have nothing to disclose regarding the topic of this article. They have no affiliation with, or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial or non-financial interest in the subject matter discussed in this manuscript. Giustino Varrassi is an Editor-in-Chief of Pain and Therapy. Giustino Varrassi was not involved in the selection of peer reviewers for the manuscript nor any of the subsequent editorial decisions.

Ethical Approval

This study was approved by the Local Ethics Committee (747/2023/DISP/AUSLPC) and performed in line with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki.
==== Refs
References

1. Breivik H Eisenberg E O’Brien T OPENMinds The individual and societal burden of chronic pain in Europe: the case for strategic prioritisation and action to improve knowledge and availability of appropriate care BMC Public Health 2013 13 1229 10.1186/1471-2458-13-1229 24365383
Breivik H, Eisenberg E, O’Brien T, OPENMinds. The individual and societal burden of chronic pain in Europe: the case for strategic prioritisation and action to improve knowledge and availability of appropriate care. BMC Public Health. 2013;13:1229. 10.1186/1471-2458-13-1229.24365383 10.1186/1471-2458-13-1229
2. Knezevic NN Candido KD Vlaeyen JWS Van Zundert J Cohen SP Low back pain Lancet 2021 398 10294 78 92 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00733-9 34115979
Knezevic NN, Candido KD, Vlaeyen JWS, Van Zundert J, Cohen SP. Low back pain. Lancet. 2021;398(10294):78–92. 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00733-9.34115979 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00733-9
3. Wuertz K Haglund L Inflammatory mediators in intervertebral disk degeneration and discogenic pain Glob Spine J 2013 3 3 175 184 10.1055/s-0033-1347299
Wuertz K, Haglund L. Inflammatory mediators in intervertebral disk degeneration and discogenic pain. Glob Spine J. 2013;3(3):175–84. 10.1055/s-0033-1347299.10.1055/s-0033-1347299
4. Albrecht DS Ahmed SU Kettner NW Neuroinflammation of the spinal cord and nerve roots in chronic radicular pain patients Pain 2018 159 5 968 977 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001171 29419657
Albrecht DS, Ahmed SU, Kettner NW, et al. Neuroinflammation of the spinal cord and nerve roots in chronic radicular pain patients. Pain. 2018;159(5):968–77. 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001171.29419657 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001171
5. Manchikanti L Knezevic NN Boswell MV Kaye AD Hirsch JA Epidural injections for lumbar radiculopathy and spinal stenosis: a comparative systematic review and meta-analysis Pain Physician 2016 19 3 E365 410 10.36076/ppj/2016.19.E365 27008296
Manchikanti L, Knezevic NN, Boswell MV, Kaye AD, Hirsch JA. Epidural injections for lumbar radiculopathy and spinal stenosis: a comparative systematic review and meta-analysis. Pain Physician. 2016;19(3):E365-410.27008296 10.36076/ppj/2016.19.E365
6. Manchikanti L Benyamin RM Falco FJE Kaye AD Hirsch JA Do epidural injections provide short- and long-term relief for lumbar disc herniation? A systematic review Clin Orthop 2015 473 6 1940 1956 10.1007/s11999-014-3490-4 24515404
Manchikanti L, Benyamin RM, Falco FJE, Kaye AD, Hirsch JA. Do epidural injections provide short- and long-term relief for lumbar disc herniation? A systematic review. Clin Orthop. 2015;473(6):1940–56. 10.1007/s11999-014-3490-4.24515404 10.1007/s11999-014-3490-4
7. Helm Ii S Harmon PC Noe C Transforaminal epidural steroid injections: a systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and safety Pain Physician 2021 24 S1 S209 S232 33492919
Helm Ii S, Harmon PC, Noe C, et al. Transforaminal epidural steroid injections: a systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and safety. Pain Physician. 2021;24(S1):S209–32.33492919
8. Olguner SK Celiktas M Oktay K Comparison of 1-year results of single transforaminal epidural steroid injection among patients with different spinal pathologies-related radicular pain Niger J Clin Pract 2020 23 6 835 841 10.4103/njcp.njcp_24_19 32525120
Olguner SK, Celiktas M, Oktay K, et al. Comparison of 1-year results of single transforaminal epidural steroid injection among patients with different spinal pathologies-related radicular pain. Niger J Clin Pract. 2020;23(6):835–41. 10.4103/njcp.njcp_24_19.32525120 10.4103/njcp.njcp_24_19
9. Oliveira CB Maher CG Ferreira ML Epidural corticosteroid injections for lumbosacral radicular pain Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2020 4 4 CD013577 10.1002/14651858.CD013577 32271952
Oliveira CB, Maher CG, Ferreira ML, et al. Epidural corticosteroid injections for lumbosacral radicular pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020;4(4):CD013577. 10.1002/14651858.CD013577.32271952 10.1002/14651858.CD013577
10. Napoli A Alfieri G Scipione R Andrani F Leonardi A Catalano C Pulsed radiofrequency for low-back pain and sciatica Expert Rev Med Devices 2020 17 2 83 86 10.1080/17434440.2020.1719828 31973587
Napoli A, Alfieri G, Scipione R, Andrani F, Leonardi A, Catalano C. Pulsed radiofrequency for low-back pain and sciatica. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2020;17(2):83–6. 10.1080/17434440.2020.1719828.31973587 10.1080/17434440.2020.1719828
11. Byrd D Mackey S Pulsed radiofrequency for chronic pain Curr Pain Headache Rep 2008 12 1 37 41 10.1007/s11916-008-0008-3 18417022
Byrd D, Mackey S. Pulsed radiofrequency for chronic pain. Curr Pain Headache Rep. 2008;12(1):37–41. 10.1007/s11916-008-0008-3.18417022 10.1007/s11916-008-0008-3
12. Abejón D Garcia-del-Valle S Fuentes ML Gómez-Arnau JI Reig E van Zundert J Pulsed radiofrequency in lumbar radicular pain: clinical effects in various etiological groups Pain Pract 2007 7 1 21 26 10.1111/j.1533-2500.2007.00105.x 17305674
Abejón D, Garcia-del-Valle S, Fuentes ML, Gómez-Arnau JI, Reig E, van Zundert J. Pulsed radiofrequency in lumbar radicular pain: clinical effects in various etiological groups. Pain Pract. 2007;7(1):21–6. 10.1111/j.1533-2500.2007.00105.x.17305674 10.1111/j.1533-2500.2007.00105.x
13. Chao SC Lee HT Kao TH Percutaneous pulsed radiofrequency in the treatment of cervical and lumbar radicular pain Surg Neurol 2008 70 1 59 65 10.1016/j.surneu.2007.05.046 18207554
Chao SC, Lee HT, Kao TH, et al. Percutaneous pulsed radiofrequency in the treatment of cervical and lumbar radicular pain. Surg Neurol. 2008;70(1):59–65. 10.1016/j.surneu.2007.05.046. (Discussion: 65).18207554 10.1016/j.surneu.2007.05.046
14. Koh W Choi SS Karm MH Treatment of chronic lumbosacral radicular pain using adjuvant pulsed radiofrequency: a randomized controlled study Pain Med 2015 16 3 432 441 10.1111/pme.12624 25530347
Koh W, Choi SS, Karm MH, et al. Treatment of chronic lumbosacral radicular pain using adjuvant pulsed radiofrequency: a randomized controlled study. Pain Med. 2015;16(3):432–41. 10.1111/pme.12624.25530347 10.1111/pme.12624
15. Nagda JV Davis CW Bajwa ZH Simopoulos TT Retrospective review of the efficacy and safety of repeated pulsed and continuous radiofrequency lesioning of the dorsal root ganglion/segmental nerve for lumbar radicular pain Pain Physician 2011 14 4 371 376 10.36076/ppj.2011/14/371 21785480
Nagda JV, Davis CW, Bajwa ZH, Simopoulos TT. Retrospective review of the efficacy and safety of repeated pulsed and continuous radiofrequency lesioning of the dorsal root ganglion/segmental nerve for lumbar radicular pain. Pain Physician. 2011;14(4):371–6.21785480 10.36076/ppj.2011/14/371
16. Shanthanna H Chan P McChesney J Paul J Thabane L Pulsed radiofrequency treatment of the lumbar dorsal root ganglion in patients with chronic lumbar radicular pain: a randomized, placebo-controlled pilot study J Pain Res 2014 10.2147/JPR.S55749 24453500
Shanthanna H, Chan P, McChesney J, Paul J, Thabane L. Pulsed radiofrequency treatment of the lumbar dorsal root ganglion in patients with chronic lumbar radicular pain: a randomized, placebo-controlled pilot study. J Pain Res. 2014. 10.2147/JPR.S55749.24453500 10.2147/JPR.S55749
17. Van Boxem K de Meij N Kessels A Van Kleef M Van Zundert J Pulsed radiofrequency for chronic intractable lumbosacral radicular pain: a six-month cohort study Pain Med 2015 16 6 1155 1162 10.1111/pme.12670 25580669
Van Boxem K, de Meij N, Kessels A, Van Kleef M, Van Zundert J. Pulsed radiofrequency for chronic intractable lumbosacral radicular pain: a six-month cohort study. Pain Med. 2015;16(6):1155–62. 10.1111/pme.12670.25580669 10.1111/pme.12670
18. Chua NHL Vissers KC Sluijter ME Pulsed radiofrequency treatment in interventional pain management: mechanisms and potential indications—a review Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2011 153 4 763 771 10.1007/s00701-010-0881-5 21116663
Chua NHL, Vissers KC, Sluijter ME. Pulsed radiofrequency treatment in interventional pain management: mechanisms and potential indications—a review. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2011;153(4):763–71. 10.1007/s00701-010-0881-5.21116663 10.1007/s00701-010-0881-5
19. Podhajsky RJ Sekiguchi Y Kikuchi S Myers RR The histologic effects of pulsed and continuous radiofrequency lesions at 42 °C to rat dorsal root ganglion and sciatic nerve Spine 2005 30 9 1008 1013 10.1097/01.brs.0000161005.31398.58 15864151
Podhajsky RJ, Sekiguchi Y, Kikuchi S, Myers RR. The histologic effects of pulsed and continuous radiofrequency lesions at 42 °C to rat dorsal root ganglion and sciatic nerve. Spine. 2005;30(9):1008–13. 10.1097/01.brs.0000161005.31398.58.15864151 10.1097/01.brs.0000161005.31398.58
20. Park D Chang MC The mechanism of action of pulsed radiofrequency in reducing pain: a narrative review J Yeungnam Med Sci 2022 39 3 200 205 10.12701/jyms.2022.00101 35385898
Park D, Chang MC. The mechanism of action of pulsed radiofrequency in reducing pain: a narrative review. J Yeungnam Med Sci. 2022;39(3):200–5. 10.12701/jyms.2022.00101.35385898 10.12701/jyms.2022.00101
21. Cho HK Kang JH Kim SY Changes in neuroglial activity in multiple spinal segments after caudal epidural pulsed radiofrequency in a rat model of lumbar disc herniation Pain Physician 2016 19 8 E1197 E1209 27906951
Cho HK, Kang JH, Kim SY, et al. Changes in neuroglial activity in multiple spinal segments after caudal epidural pulsed radiofrequency in a rat model of lumbar disc herniation. Pain Physician. 2016;19(8):E1197–209.27906951
22. Moffett J Fray LM Kubat NJ Activation of endogenous opioid gene expression in human keratinocytes and fibroblasts by pulsed radiofrequency energy fields J Pain Res 2012 5 347 357 10.2147/JPR.S35076 23055776
Moffett J, Fray LM, Kubat NJ. Activation of endogenous opioid gene expression in human keratinocytes and fibroblasts by pulsed radiofrequency energy fields. J Pain Res. 2012;5:347–57. 10.2147/JPR.S35076.23055776 10.2147/JPR.S35076
23. Hagiwara S Iwasaka H Takeshima N Noguchi T Mechanisms of analgesic action of pulsed radiofrequency on adjuvant-induced pain in the rat: roles of descending adrenergic and serotonergic systems Eur J Pain 2009 13 3 249 252 10.1016/j.ejpain.2008.04.013 18539061
Hagiwara S, Iwasaka H, Takeshima N, Noguchi T. Mechanisms of analgesic action of pulsed radiofrequency on adjuvant-induced pain in the rat: roles of descending adrenergic and serotonergic systems. Eur J Pain. 2009;13(3):249–52. 10.1016/j.ejpain.2008.04.013.18539061 10.1016/j.ejpain.2008.04.013
24. Erdine S Bilir A Cosman ER Cosman ER Ultrastructural changes in axons following exposure to pulsed radiofrequency fields Pain Pract 2009 9 6 407 417 10.1111/j.1533-2500.2009.00317.x 19761513
Erdine S, Bilir A, Cosman ER, Cosman ER. Ultrastructural changes in axons following exposure to pulsed radiofrequency fields. Pain Pract. 2009;9(6):407–17. 10.1111/j.1533-2500.2009.00317.x.19761513 10.1111/j.1533-2500.2009.00317.x
25. Vallejo R Tilley DM Williams J Labak S Aliaga L Benyamin RM Pulsed radiofrequency modulates pain regulatory gene expression along the nociceptive pathway Pain Physician 2013 16 5 E601 613 10.36076/ppj.2013/16/E601 24077210
Vallejo R, Tilley DM, Williams J, Labak S, Aliaga L, Benyamin RM. Pulsed radiofrequency modulates pain regulatory gene expression along the nociceptive pathway. Pain Physician. 2013;16(5):E601-613.24077210 10.36076/ppj.2013/16/E601
26. Jiang R Li P Yao YX Pulsed radiofrequency to the dorsal root ganglion or the sciatic nerve reduces neuropathic pain behavior, decreases peripheral pro-inflammatory cytokines and spinal β-catenin in chronic constriction injury rats Reg Anesth Pain Med 2019 10.1136/rapm-2018-100032 31792027
Jiang R, Li P, Yao YX, et al. Pulsed radiofrequency to the dorsal root ganglion or the sciatic nerve reduces neuropathic pain behavior, decreases peripheral pro-inflammatory cytokines and spinal β-catenin in chronic constriction injury rats. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2019. 10.1136/rapm-2018-100032.31792027 10.1136/rapm-2018-100032
27. Arons M Pilmane M Bhaskar A Kopsky DJ Romanenko V Rohof O Pulsed radiofrequency increases nestin and matrix metalloproteinase-2 expression in porcine lumbar dorsal root ganglion Anesthesiol Pain Med 2022 12 1 e110531 10.5812/aapm.110531
Arons M, Pilmane M, Bhaskar A, Kopsky DJ, Romanenko V, Rohof O. Pulsed radiofrequency increases nestin and matrix metalloproteinase-2 expression in porcine lumbar dorsal root ganglion. Anesthesiol Pain Med. 2022;12(1): e110531. 10.5812/aapm.110531.10.5812/aapm.110531
28. Hong LW Chen KT A real-world evidence of a consecutive treatment of 42 spine-related pain using dorsal root ganglion-pulsed radiofrequency (DRG-PRF) Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2020 197 106186 10.1016/j.clineuro.2020.106186 32916395
Hong LW, Chen KT. A real-world evidence of a consecutive treatment of 42 spine-related pain using dorsal root ganglion-pulsed radiofrequency (DRG-PRF). Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2020;197:106186. 10.1016/j.clineuro.2020.106186.32916395 10.1016/j.clineuro.2020.106186
29. Kim WH Sim WS Shin BS Effects of two different doses of epidural steroid on blood glucose levels and pain control in patients with diabetes mellitus Pain Physician 2013 16 6 557 568 24284841
Kim WH, Sim WS, Shin BS, et al. Effects of two different doses of epidural steroid on blood glucose levels and pain control in patients with diabetes mellitus. Pain Physician. 2013;16(6):557–68.24284841
30. Botwin KP Gruber RD Bouchlas CG Torres-Ramos FM Freeman TL Slaten WK Complications of fluoroscopically guided transforaminal lumbar epidural injections Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2000 81 8 1045 1050 10.1053/apmr.2000.7166 10943753
Botwin KP, Gruber RD, Bouchlas CG, Torres-Ramos FM, Freeman TL, Slaten WK. Complications of fluoroscopically guided transforaminal lumbar epidural injections. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2000;81(8):1045–50. 10.1053/apmr.2000.7166.10943753 10.1053/apmr.2000.7166
31. Baker R Dreyfuss P Mercer S Bogduk N Cervical transforaminal injection of corticosteroids into a radicular artery: a possible mechanism for spinal cord injury Pain 2003 103 1–2 211 215 10.1016/s0304-3959(02)00343-3 12749976
Baker R, Dreyfuss P, Mercer S, Bogduk N. Cervical transforaminal injection of corticosteroids into a radicular artery: a possible mechanism for spinal cord injury. Pain. 2003;103(1–2):211–5. 10.1016/s0304-3959(02)00343-3.12749976 10.1016/s0304-3959(02)00343-3
32. Moon HS Kim YD Song BH Cha YD Song JH Lee MH Position of dorsal root ganglia in the lumbosacral region in patients with radiculopathy Korean J Anesthesiol 2010 59 6 398 402 10.4097/kjae.2010.59.6.398 21253377
Moon HS, Kim YD, Song BH, Cha YD, Song JH, Lee MH. Position of dorsal root ganglia in the lumbosacral region in patients with radiculopathy. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2010;59(6):398–402. 10.4097/kjae.2010.59.6.398.21253377 10.4097/kjae.2010.59.6.398
33. Viswanathan VK Kanna RM Farhadi HF Role of transforaminal epidural injections or selective nerve root blocks in the management of lumbar radicular syndrome—a narrative, evidence-based review J Clin Orthop Trauma 2020 11 5 802 809 10.1016/j.jcot.2020.06.004 32904233
Viswanathan VK, Kanna RM, Farhadi HF. Role of transforaminal epidural injections or selective nerve root blocks in the management of lumbar radicular syndrome—a narrative, evidence-based review. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2020;11(5):802–9. 10.1016/j.jcot.2020.06.004.32904233 10.1016/j.jcot.2020.06.004
34. Malik K Benzon HT Radiofrequency applications to dorsal root ganglia: a literature review Anesthesiology 2008 109 3 527 542 10.1097/ALN.0b013e318182c86e 18719452
Malik K, Benzon HT. Radiofrequency applications to dorsal root ganglia: a literature review. Anesthesiology. 2008;109(3):527–42. 10.1097/ALN.0b013e318182c86e.18719452 10.1097/ALN.0b013e318182c86e
35. Cahana A Van Zundert J Macrea L van Kleef M Sluijter M Pulsed radiofrequency: current clinical and biological literature available Pain Med 2006 7 5 411 423 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2006.00148.x 17014600
Cahana A, Van Zundert J, Macrea L, van Kleef M, Sluijter M. Pulsed radiofrequency: current clinical and biological literature available. Pain Med. 2006;7(5):411–23. 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2006.00148.x.17014600 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2006.00148.x
36. Vuka I Došenović S Marciuš T Efficacy and safety of pulsed radiofrequency as a method of dorsal root ganglia stimulation for treatment of non-neuropathic pain: a systematic review BMC Anesthesiol 2020 20 1 105 10.1186/s12871-020-01023-9 32366286
Vuka I, Došenović S, Marciuš T, et al. Efficacy and safety of pulsed radiofrequency as a method of dorsal root ganglia stimulation for treatment of non-neuropathic pain: a systematic review. BMC Anesthesiol. 2020;20(1):105. 10.1186/s12871-020-01023-9.32366286 10.1186/s12871-020-01023-9
37. Fei Y Deng J Lv H Yao M Wang T Huang B Pulsed radiofrequency of dorsal root ganglion of upper thoracic segment for herpes zoster neuralgia: case report Medicine (Baltimore) 2020 99 25 e20807 10.1097/MD.0000000000020807 32569227
Fei Y, Deng J, Lv H, Yao M, Wang T, Huang B. Pulsed radiofrequency of dorsal root ganglion of upper thoracic segment for herpes zoster neuralgia: case report. Medicine (Baltimore). 2020;99(25):e20807. 10.1097/MD.0000000000020807.32569227 10.1097/MD.0000000000020807
38. Laksono RM Kalim H Rohman MS Widodo N Ahmad MR Halim W Pulsed radiofrequency decreases pERK and affects intracellular Ca2+ influx, cytosolic ATP level, and mitochondrial membrane potential in the sensitized dorsal root ganglion neuron induced by N-methyl D-aspartate J Pain Res 2023 16 1697 1711 10.2147/JPR.S409658 37252110
Laksono RM, Kalim H, Rohman MS, Widodo N, Ahmad MR, Halim W. Pulsed radiofrequency decreases pERK and affects intracellular Ca2+ influx, cytosolic ATP level, and mitochondrial membrane potential in the sensitized dorsal root ganglion neuron induced by N-methyl D-aspartate. J Pain Res. 2023;16:1697–711. 10.2147/JPR.S409658.37252110 10.2147/JPR.S409658
39. Cosman ER Cosman ER Electric and thermal field effects in tissue around radiofrequency electrodes Pain Med 2005 6 6 405 424 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2005.00076.x 16336478
Cosman ER, Cosman ER. Electric and thermal field effects in tissue around radiofrequency electrodes. Pain Med. 2005;6(6):405–24. 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2005.00076.x.16336478 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2005.00076.x
40. Austin PC Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity-score matched samples Stat Med 2009 28 25 3083 3107 10.1002/sim.3697 19757444
Austin PC. Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity-score matched samples. Stat Med. 2009;28(25):3083–107. 10.1002/sim.3697.19757444 10.1002/sim.3697
41. Kim SJ Park SJ Yoon DM Yoon KB Kim SH Predictors of the analgesic efficacy of pulsed radiofrequency treatment in patients with chronic lumbosacral radicular pain: a retrospective observational study J Pain Res 2018 11 1223 1230 10.2147/JPR.S164414 29983585
Kim SJ, Park SJ, Yoon DM, Yoon KB, Kim SH. Predictors of the analgesic efficacy of pulsed radiofrequency treatment in patients with chronic lumbosacral radicular pain: a retrospective observational study. J Pain Res. 2018;11:1223–30. 10.2147/JPR.S164414.29983585 10.2147/JPR.S164414
42. De la Cruz J Benzecry Almeida D Silva Marques M Ramina R Fortes Kubiak RJ Elucidating the mechanisms of pulsed radiofrequency for pain treatment Cureus 2023 15 9 e44922 10.7759/cureus.44922 37814752
De la Cruz J, Benzecry Almeida D, Silva Marques M, Ramina R, Fortes Kubiak RJ. Elucidating the mechanisms of pulsed radiofrequency for pain treatment. Cureus. 2023;15(9):e44922. 10.7759/cureus.44922.37814752 10.7759/cureus.44922
43. Marliana A Setyopranoto I Setyaningsih I Rhatomy S The effect of pulsed radiofrequency on radicular pain in lumbal herniated nucleus pulposus: a systematic review and meta-analysis Anesthesiol Pain Med 2021 11 2 e111420 10.5812/aapm.111420
Marliana A, Setyopranoto I, Setyaningsih I, Rhatomy S. The effect of pulsed radiofrequency on radicular pain in lumbal herniated nucleus pulposus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Anesthesiol Pain Med. 2021;11(2): e111420. 10.5812/aapm.111420.10.5812/aapm.111420
44. Park S Park JH Jang JN Pulsed radiofrequency of lumbar dorsal root ganglion for lumbar radicular pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis Pain Pract 2024 24 5 772 785 10.1111/papr.13351 38294072
Park S, Park JH, Jang JN, et al. Pulsed radiofrequency of lumbar dorsal root ganglion for lumbar radicular pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Pain Pract. 2024;24(5):772–85. 10.1111/papr.13351.38294072 10.1111/papr.13351
45. Vuka I Vučić K Repić T Ferhatović Hamzić L Sapunar D Puljak L Electrical stimulation of dorsal root ganglion in the context of pain: a systematic review of in vitro and in vivo animal model studies Neuromodulation 2018 21 3 213 224 10.1111/ner.12722 29152818
Vuka I, Vučić K, Repić T, Ferhatović Hamzić L, Sapunar D, Puljak L. Electrical stimulation of dorsal root ganglion in the context of pain: a systematic review of in vitro and in vivo animal model studies. Neuromodulation. 2018;21(3):213–24. 10.1111/ner.12722.29152818 10.1111/ner.12722
46. Facchini G Spinnato P Guglielmi G Albisinni U Bazzocchi A A comprehensive review of pulsed radiofrequency in the treatment of pain associated with different spinal conditions Br J Radiol 2017 90 1073 20150406 10.1259/bjr.20150406 28186832
Facchini G, Spinnato P, Guglielmi G, Albisinni U, Bazzocchi A. A comprehensive review of pulsed radiofrequency in the treatment of pain associated with different spinal conditions. Br J Radiol. 2017;90(1073):20150406. 10.1259/bjr.20150406.28186832 10.1259/bjr.20150406
47. Van Zundert J Patijn J Kessels A Lamé I van Suijlekom H van Kleef M Pulsed radiofrequency adjacent to the cervical dorsal root ganglion in chronic cervical radicular pain: a double blind sham controlled randomized clinical trial Pain 2007 127 1–2 173 182 10.1016/j.pain.2006.09.002 17055165
Van Zundert J, Patijn J, Kessels A, Lamé I, van Suijlekom H, van Kleef M. Pulsed radiofrequency adjacent to the cervical dorsal root ganglion in chronic cervical radicular pain: a double blind sham controlled randomized clinical trial. Pain. 2007;127(1–2):173–82. 10.1016/j.pain.2006.09.002.17055165 10.1016/j.pain.2006.09.002
48. Chang MC Cho YW Ahn SH Comparison between bipolar pulsed radiofrequency and monopolar pulsed radiofrequency in chronic lumbosacral radicular pain: a randomized controlled trial Medicine (Baltimore) 2017 96 9 e6236 10.1097/MD.0000000000006236 28248888
Chang MC, Cho YW, Ahn SH. Comparison between bipolar pulsed radiofrequency and monopolar pulsed radiofrequency in chronic lumbosacral radicular pain: a randomized controlled trial. Medicine (Baltimore). 2017;96(9): e6236. 10.1097/MD.0000000000006236.28248888 10.1097/MD.0000000000006236
49. Lee DG Cho YW Ahn SH Chang MC The effect of bipolar pulsed radiofrequency treatment on chronic lumbosacral radicular pain refractory to monopolar pulsed radiofrequency treatment Pain Physician 2018 21 2 E97 E103 29565952
Lee DG, Cho YW, Ahn SH, Chang MC. The effect of bipolar pulsed radiofrequency treatment on chronic lumbosacral radicular pain refractory to monopolar pulsed radiofrequency treatment. Pain Physician. 2018;21(2):E97–103.29565952
50. Kim K Jo D Kim E Pulsed Radiofrequency to the dorsal root ganglion in acute herpes zoster and postherpetic neuralgia Pain Physician 2017 20 3 E411 E418 10.36076/ppj.2017.E418 28339440
Kim K, Jo D, Kim E. Pulsed Radiofrequency to the dorsal root ganglion in acute herpes zoster and postherpetic neuralgia. Pain Physician. 2017;20(3):E411–8.28339440 10.36076/ppj.2017.E418
51. Song Y Yu Z Guan J Efficacy of high-voltage pulsed radiofrequency in zoster-associated pain: a meta-analysis and systematic review Anesthesiol Res Pract 2023 2023 8479293 10.1155/2023/8479293 38162190
Song Y, Yu Z, Guan J, et al. Efficacy of high-voltage pulsed radiofrequency in zoster-associated pain: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Anesthesiol Res Pract. 2023;2023:8479293. 10.1155/2023/8479293.38162190 10.1155/2023/8479293
52. Sun CL Li XL Li CW He N Zhang J Xue FS High-voltage, long-duration pulsed radiofrequency to the dorsal root ganglion provides improved pain relief for herpes zoster neuralgia in the subacute stage Pain Physician 2023 26 3 E155 E162 37192238
Sun CL, Li XL, Li CW, He N, Zhang J, Xue FS. High-voltage, long-duration pulsed radiofrequency to the dorsal root ganglion provides improved pain relief for herpes zoster neuralgia in the subacute stage. Pain Physician. 2023;26(3):E155–62.37192238
53. Wang B Du Z Xia J Zhang H Efficacy of high-voltage pulsed radiofrequency for the treatment of elderly patients with acute herpes zoster neuralgia Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992) 2021 67 4 585 589 10.1590/1806-9282.20201124 34495065
Wang B, Du Z, Xia J, Zhang H. Efficacy of high-voltage pulsed radiofrequency for the treatment of elderly patients with acute herpes zoster neuralgia. Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992). 2021;67(4):585–9. 10.1590/1806-9282.20201124.34495065 10.1590/1806-9282.20201124
54. Erken B Edipoglu IS Efficacy of high-voltage pulsed radiofrequency of the dorsal root ganglion for treatment of chronic lumbosacral radicular pain: a randomized clinical trial Neuromodulation 2024 27 1 135 140 10.1016/j.neurom.2022.10.056 36463027
Erken B, Edipoglu IS. Efficacy of high-voltage pulsed radiofrequency of the dorsal root ganglion for treatment of chronic lumbosacral radicular pain: a randomized clinical trial. Neuromodulation. 2024;27(1):135–40. 10.1016/j.neurom.2022.10.056.36463027 10.1016/j.neurom.2022.10.056
55. Vigneri S Sindaco G La Grua M Electrocatheter-mediated high-voltage pulsed radiofrequency of the dorsal root ganglion in the treatment of chronic lumbosacral neuropathic pain: a randomized controlled study Clin J Pain 2020 36 1 25 33 10.1097/AJP.0000000000000766 31577546
Vigneri S, Sindaco G, La Grua M, et al. Electrocatheter-mediated high-voltage pulsed radiofrequency of the dorsal root ganglion in the treatment of chronic lumbosacral neuropathic pain: a randomized controlled study. Clin J Pain. 2020;36(1):25–33. 10.1097/AJP.0000000000000766.31577546 10.1097/AJP.0000000000000766
56. Jang JN Park S Park JH Output current and efficacy of pulsed radiofrequency of the lumbar dorsal root ganglion in patients with lumbar radiculopathy: a prospective, double-blind, randomized pilot study Pain Physician 2023 26 7 E797 E804 37976483
Jang JN, Park S, Park JH, et al. Output current and efficacy of pulsed radiofrequency of the lumbar dorsal root ganglion in patients with lumbar radiculopathy: a prospective, double-blind, randomized pilot study. Pain Physician. 2023;26(7):E797–804.37976483
57. Jang JN Park S Park JH Comparison of efficacy according to voltage of pulsed radiofrequency treatment to lumbar dorsal root ganglion in patient with lumbar radiculopathy: pilot study Medicine (Baltimore) 2023 102 17 e33617 10.1097/MD.0000000000033617 37115073
Jang JN, Park S, Park JH, et al. Comparison of efficacy according to voltage of pulsed radiofrequency treatment to lumbar dorsal root ganglion in patient with lumbar radiculopathy: pilot study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2023;102(17): e33617. 10.1097/MD.0000000000033617.37115073 10.1097/MD.0000000000033617
58. Smith CC McCormick ZL Mattie R MacVicar J Duszynski B Stojanovic MP The effectiveness of lumbar transforaminal injection of steroid for the treatment of radicular pain: a comprehensive review of the published data Pain Med 2020 21 3 472 487 10.1093/pm/pnz160 31343693
Smith CC, McCormick ZL, Mattie R, MacVicar J, Duszynski B, Stojanovic MP. The effectiveness of lumbar transforaminal injection of steroid for the treatment of radicular pain: a comprehensive review of the published data. Pain Med. 2020;21(3):472–87. 10.1093/pm/pnz160.31343693 10.1093/pm/pnz160
59. Manchikanti L Singh V Pampati V Falco FJ Hirsch JA Comparison of the efficacy of caudal, interlaminar, and transforaminal epidural injections in managing lumbar disc herniation: is one method superior to the other? Korean J Pain 2015 28 1 11 21 10.3344/kjp.2015.28.1.11 25589942
Manchikanti L, Singh V, Pampati V, Falco FJ, Hirsch JA. Comparison of the efficacy of caudal, interlaminar, and transforaminal epidural injections in managing lumbar disc herniation: is one method superior to the other? Korean J Pain. 2015;28(1):11–21. 10.3344/kjp.2015.28.1.11.25589942 10.3344/kjp.2015.28.1.11
60. Manchikanti L Cash KA Pampati V Falco FJE Transforaminal epidural injections in chronic lumbar disc herniation: a randomized, double-blind, active-control trial Pain Physician 2014 17 4 E489 501 10.36076/ppj.2014/17/E489 25054399
Manchikanti L, Cash KA, Pampati V, Falco FJE. Transforaminal epidural injections in chronic lumbar disc herniation: a randomized, double-blind, active-control trial. Pain Physician. 2014;17(4):E489-501.25054399 10.36076/ppj.2014/17/E489
61. Kraiwattanapong C Wechmongkolgorn S Chatriyanuyok B Outcomes of fluoroscopically guided lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis patients Asian Spine J 2014 8 2 119 128 10.4184/asj.2014.8.2.119 24761192
Kraiwattanapong C, Wechmongkolgorn S, Chatriyanuyok B, et al. Outcomes of fluoroscopically guided lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis patients. Asian Spine J. 2014;8(2):119–28. 10.4184/asj.2014.8.2.119.24761192 10.4184/asj.2014.8.2.119
62. Gharibo CG Varlotta GP Rhame EE Liu ECJ Bendo JA Perloff MD Interlaminar versus transforaminal epidural steroids for the treatment of subacute lumbar radicular pain: a randomized, blinded, prospective outcome study Pain Physician 2011 14 6 499 511 10.36076/ppj.2011/14/499 22086091
Gharibo CG, Varlotta GP, Rhame EE, Liu ECJ, Bendo JA, Perloff MD. Interlaminar versus transforaminal epidural steroids for the treatment of subacute lumbar radicular pain: a randomized, blinded, prospective outcome study. Pain Physician. 2011;14(6):499–511.22086091 10.36076/ppj.2011/14/499
63. Gupta R Singh S Kaur S Singh K Aujla K Correlation between epidurographic contrast flow patterns and clinical effectiveness in chronic lumbar discogenic radicular pain treated with epidural steroid injections via different approaches Korean J Pain 2014 27 4 353 359 10.3344/kjp.2014.27.4.353 25317285
Gupta R, Singh S, Kaur S, Singh K, Aujla K. Correlation between epidurographic contrast flow patterns and clinical effectiveness in chronic lumbar discogenic radicular pain treated with epidural steroid injections via different approaches. Korean J Pain. 2014;27(4):353–9. 10.3344/kjp.2014.27.4.353.25317285 10.3344/kjp.2014.27.4.353
64. Park Y Lee WY Ahn JK Nam HS Lee KH Percutaneous adhesiolysis versus transforaminal epidural steroid injection for the treatment of chronic radicular pain caused by lumbar foraminal spinal stenosis: a retrospective comparative study Ann Rehabil Med 2015 39 6 941 949 10.5535/arm.2015.39.6.941 26798608
Park Y, Lee WY, Ahn JK, Nam HS, Lee KH. Percutaneous adhesiolysis versus transforaminal epidural steroid injection for the treatment of chronic radicular pain caused by lumbar foraminal spinal stenosis: a retrospective comparative study. Ann Rehabil Med. 2015;39(6):941–9. 10.5535/arm.2015.39.6.941.26798608 10.5535/arm.2015.39.6.941
65. Fathy W Hussein M Magdy R Effect of radiofrequency on dorsal root ganglion versus transforaminal steroids injection on tumor necrosis factor-alpha level in lumbar radicular pain Pain Physician 2023 26 6 E671 E677 37847920
Fathy W, Hussein M, Magdy R, et al. Effect of radiofrequency on dorsal root ganglion versus transforaminal steroids injection on tumor necrosis factor-alpha level in lumbar radicular pain. Pain Physician. 2023;26(6):E671–7.37847920
66. Shanthanna H Chan P McChesney J Thabane L Paul J Pulsed radiofrequency treatment of the lumbar dorsal root ganglion in patients with chronic lumbar radicular pain: a randomized, placebo-controlled pilot study J Pain Res 2014 7 47 55 10.2147/JPR.S55749 24453500
Shanthanna H, Chan P, McChesney J, Thabane L, Paul J. Pulsed radiofrequency treatment of the lumbar dorsal root ganglion in patients with chronic lumbar radicular pain: a randomized, placebo-controlled pilot study. J Pain Res. 2014;7:47–55. 10.2147/JPR.S55749.24453500 10.2147/JPR.S55749
67. Yang L Huang Y Ma J Clinical outcome of pulsed-radiofrequency combined with transforaminal epidural steroid injection for lumbosacral radicular pain caused by distinct etiology Front Neurosci 2021 15 683298 10.3389/fnins.2021.683298 34393706
Yang L, Huang Y, Ma J, et al. Clinical outcome of pulsed-radiofrequency combined with transforaminal epidural steroid injection for lumbosacral radicular pain caused by distinct etiology. Front Neurosci. 2021;15:683298. 10.3389/fnins.2021.683298.34393706 10.3389/fnins.2021.683298
68. Ding Y Li H Zhu Y Yao P Zhao G Transforaminal epidural steroid injection combined with pulsed radio frequency on spinal nerve root for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation J Pain Res 2018 11 1531 1539 10.2147/JPR.S174318 30147357
Ding Y, Li H, Zhu Y, Yao P, Zhao G. Transforaminal epidural steroid injection combined with pulsed radio frequency on spinal nerve root for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation. J Pain Res. 2018;11:1531–9. 10.2147/JPR.S174318.30147357 10.2147/JPR.S174318
69. Lee DG Ahn SH Lee J Comparative effectivenesses of pulsed radiofrequency and transforaminal steroid injection for radicular pain due to disc herniation: a prospective randomized trial J Korean Med Sci 2016 31 8 1324 1330 10.3346/jkms.2016.31.8.1324 27478346
Lee DG, Ahn SH, Lee J. Comparative effectivenesses of pulsed radiofrequency and transforaminal steroid injection for radicular pain due to disc herniation: a prospective randomized trial. J Korean Med Sci. 2016;31(8):1324–30. 10.3346/jkms.2016.31.8.1324.27478346 10.3346/jkms.2016.31.8.1324
70. Kent AR Min X Hogan QH Kramer JM Mechanisms of dorsal root ganglion stimulation in pain suppression: a computational modeling analysis Neuromodulation 2018 21 3 234 246 10.1111/ner.12754 29377442
Kent AR, Min X, Hogan QH, Kramer JM. Mechanisms of dorsal root ganglion stimulation in pain suppression: a computational modeling analysis. Neuromodulation. 2018;21(3):234–46. 10.1111/ner.12754.29377442 10.1111/ner.12754
71. D’Souza RS Kubrova E Her YF Dorsal root ganglion stimulation for lower extremity neuropathic pain syndromes: an evidence-based literature review Adv Ther 2022 39 10 4440 4473 10.1007/s12325-022-02244-9 35994195
D’Souza RS, Kubrova E, Her YF, et al. Dorsal root ganglion stimulation for lower extremity neuropathic pain syndromes: an evidence-based literature review. Adv Ther. 2022;39(10):4440–73. 10.1007/s12325-022-02244-9.35994195 10.1007/s12325-022-02244-9
72. Chapman KB Spiegel MA van Helmond N Dorsal root ganglion stimulation as a salvage therapy following failed spinal cord stimulation Neuromodulation 2022 25 7 1024 1032 10.1016/j.neurom.2022.04.050 35760751
Chapman KB, Spiegel MA, van Helmond N, et al. Dorsal root ganglion stimulation as a salvage therapy following failed spinal cord stimulation. Neuromodulation. 2022;25(7):1024–32. 10.1016/j.neurom.2022.04.050.35760751 10.1016/j.neurom.2022.04.050
73. Leoni MLG Moschini E Beretta M Zanello M Nolli M The modified NUTRIC score (mNUTRIC) is associated with increased 28-day mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients: Internal validation of a prediction model Clin Nutr ESPEN 2022 48 202 209 10.1016/j.clnesp.2022.02.014 35331492
Leoni MLG, Moschini E, Beretta M, Zanello M, Nolli M. The modified NUTRIC score (mNUTRIC) is associated with increased 28-day mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients: Internal validation of a prediction model. Clin Nutr ESPEN. 2022;48:202–9. 10.1016/j.clnesp.2022.02.014.35331492 10.1016/j.clnesp.2022.02.014
74. Leoni MLG Lombardelli L Colombi D Prediction of 28-day mortality in critically ill patients with COVID-19: Development and internal validation of a clinical prediction model PLoS ONE 2021 16 7 e0254550 10.1371/journal.pone.0254550 34255793
Leoni MLG, Lombardelli L, Colombi D, et al. Prediction of 28-day mortality in critically ill patients with COVID-19: Development and internal validation of a clinical prediction model. PLoS ONE. 2021;16(7):e0254550. 10.1371/journal.pone.0254550.34255793 10.1371/journal.pone.0254550
75. Austin PC An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies Multivar Behav Res 2011 46 3 399 424 10.1080/00273171.2011.568786
Austin PC. An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies. Multivar Behav Res. 2011;46(3):399–424. 10.1080/00273171.2011.568786.10.1080/00273171.2011.568786
76. Leoni MLG Schatman ME Demartini L Lo Bianco G Terranova G Genicular nerve pulsed dose radiofrequency (PDRF) compared to intra-articular and genicular nerve PDRF in knee osteoarthritis pain: a propensity score-matched analysis J Pain Res 2020 13 1315 1321 10.2147/JPR.S240138 32581573
Leoni MLG, Schatman ME, Demartini L, Lo Bianco G, Terranova G. Genicular nerve pulsed dose radiofrequency (PDRF) compared to intra-articular and genicular nerve PDRF in knee osteoarthritis pain: a propensity score-matched analysis. J Pain Res. 2020;13:1315–21. 10.2147/JPR.S240138.32581573 10.2147/JPR.S240138
77. Jandura J Vajda M Kostysyn R Previous lumbar spine surgery decreases the therapeutic efficacy of dorsal root ganglion pulsed radiofrequency in patients with chronic lumbosacral radicular pain J Pers Med 2023 13 7 1054 10.3390/jpm13071054 37511667
Jandura J, Vajda M, Kostysyn R, et al. Previous lumbar spine surgery decreases the therapeutic efficacy of dorsal root ganglion pulsed radiofrequency in patients with chronic lumbosacral radicular pain. J Pers Med. 2023;13(7):1054. 10.3390/jpm13071054.37511667 10.3390/jpm13071054
