Skip to content

In Vivo Arthroscopic Temperatures: Comparison between Two Types of Radiofrequency Ablation Systems

In individuals undergoing shoulder, hip and knee arthroscopy, how does the use of ArthroCare 'Coblation technology' ablation system compare to the regular diathermy ablation system effect in the intra-articular fluid temperatures during arthroscopy?

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ANZCTR
Registry ID
ACTRN12613000569707
Enrollment
80
Registered
2013-05-20
Start date
2014-03-07
Completion date
2016-06-12
Last updated
2020-01-13

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

None listed

Brief summary

Radiofrequency ablation is a commonly utilized tool in arthroscopic orthopaedic surgery primarily in joints such as shoulders and knees. It allows accurate debridement of soft tissues and control of bleeding. Use of radiofrequency ablation wands produces heat either directly or as a by-product. Studies have shown that if these temperatures exceed a certain threshold, (commonly known to be 45 degrees Celcius), the risk of injury to surrounding tissues within the joint is increases. We will be comparing two types of radiofrequency ablation systems that are very widely used today in arthroscopic surgery. One system, such as the Striker SERFAS Energy probe, uses radiofrequency energy to generate heat at the tip of the instrument. This heat is used to ablate or remove unwanted or damaged tissues and may also be used to coagulate vessels to control bleeding. The other system, such as that used in the Arthrocare RF wands, uses 'coblation' technology. This technology differs in that it uses radiofrequency energy to produce a controlled non-heat driven process where it excites electrodes within the surrounding saline solution to create a charged plasma gas that breaks up molecular bonds within tissue. Heat in this system, is produced as a by-product, and as claimed by its manufacturers, at much lower temperatures. In this study we will be comparing the temperatures established in arthroscopic surgery to determine the risk of injury to surrounding tissues using both these two systems. We will be recruiting 80 patients undergoing arthroscopic knee or shoulder surgery for a variety of conditions. The patients will be randomised to the ablation system and temperatures will be continuously monitored and recorded using an independent digital temperature probe. The probe will be placed in the same location within the joint in all patients through a small key-hole incision. The duration of surgery will also be recorded. Many variable can affect the fluid temperatures and these incluced, baseline infused fluid temperature, flow rate, and number of ports. We will not be regulating these variables in order to create a more natural clinical scenario which will in turn produce results that are more relevant to the common orthopaedic surgeon. Results will be analysed to determine the average and maximum temperatures reached in both systems, and in different types of surgeries (e.g. rotator cuff repair, sub-acromial decompression and acromioplasty, and stabilisation in shoulders, and ACL reconstruction in knees). Statistical analyses will be used to determine if there are any statistically significant differences in results using the two types of ablation systems and whether in fact using the Arthrocare charged plasma 'coblation' process will produce lower and potentially safer temperatures.

Interventions

One group will comprise of patients undergoing arthroscopy using the ArthroCare ablation system ('Coblation') which uses radiofrequency energy to excite electrodes in the surrounding saline solution to produce a charged plasma gas that breaks down molecular bonds in tissue. Coblation system uses radiofrequency that range from 100-500 kHz. The duration of the surgery is very variable depending on the type of surgery and severity of condition.

Sponsors

ORIQL (Orthopaedic Research Institute of Queensland)
Lead SponsorCharities/Societies/Foundations

Study design

Allocation
Randomised controlled trial
Intervention model
Parallel
Primary purpose
Treatment

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
All
Age
18 Years to 70 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

1) Clinically indicated for shoulder arthrosopcy: - rotator cuff repair - sub-acromial decompression, acromioplasty - acromioclavicular joint excision - shoulder stabilisation or labral repair 2) Clinically indicated for knee arthroscopy - ACL reconstruction 3) Hip arhtroscopy for femoral acetabular impingement

Exclusion criteria

<18 years of age

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ANZCTR · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026