Skip to content

Effectiveness of High-Voltage PRF for Chronic Lumbosacral Radicular Pain

Effectiveness of High-Voltage Pulsed Radiofrequency for Chronic Lumbosacral Radicular Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT07303309
Enrollment
22
Registered
2025-12-24
Start date
2025-02-07
Completion date
2025-04-29
Last updated
2025-12-24

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

Conditions

Chronic Radicular Back Pain, Lumbosacral Radicular Pain

Keywords

pain measurement, high-voltage, pulsed radiofrequency, chronic lumbosacral radicular pain, visual analogue pain scale

Brief summary

This randomized controlled trial compared high-voltage (60 V) and low-voltage (45 V) pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) for treating chronic lumbosacral radicular pain in adult patients. The study evaluated differences in pain reduction (using the Visual Analogue Scale \[VAS\] and Numeric Rating Scale \[NRS-11\]), functional ability (using Oswestry Disability Index scores), serum Interleukin-6 levels, and overall safety. All participants received fluoroscopy-guided PRF at 42°C for three 120-second cycles and were followed for approximately 6 weeks.

Detailed description

Consecutive patients who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria were enrolled and randomized into two groups: the intervention group (high-voltage PRF, 60 V) and the control group (low-voltage PRF, 45 V). The sample size was calculated using the Neyman-Pearson approach with a superiority hypothesis, assuming that the intervention group would achieve greater pain reduction than the control group. Accounting for an estimated 20% dropout rate, 11 participants were required per group. Patients who voluntarily withdrew from the study were excluded from analysis, whereas patients who discontinued the intervention due to adverse effects during or after the procedure were included in the analysis and reported.

Interventions

DEVICEPulsed Radiofrequency

A specialist performed fluoroscopy-guided monopolar Pulsed Radiofrequency (PRF) on a prone patient using a 22-gauge cannula (Cosman CC, CR type, 10 cm with a 10 mm active tip). Sensory stimulation prior to the procedure was applied at 200 Ohm, 50 Hz (threshold: 0.3 - 0.5 V), and motor stimulation at 2 Hz (threshold: 0.9 - 1.5 V). PRF was applied at a maximum temperature of 42 centigrade, with a frequency of 2 Hz, pulse width of 20 milliseconds, and a duration of 120 seconds per cycle for three cycles. An operating room nurse set the voltage at 45 V or 60 V.

DRUGPost-operative Analgesia

Post-procedure analgesia in both groups was provided via IV fentanyl 0.5-1 µg/kg, administered as needed for patients reporting an NRS score greater than 4. This intervention was not a primary focus of the study.

Sponsors

Faculty of Medicine, Gadjah Mada University
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
Sardjito General Hospital, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
Hasanuddin University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
QUADRUPLE (Subject, Caregiver, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)

Intervention model description

Standard/Low-voltage pulsed radiofrequency (45V) was compared with high-voltage pulsed radiofrequency (60 V)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Adults aged ≥ 18 years old * Numeric Rating Scale (NRS-11) ≥ 4 at screening * Clinical diagnosis of lumbosacral radicular pain with symptom duration ≥ 12 weeks * Insufficient response to conservative therapy, including but not limited to pharmacotherapy and/or physiotherapy

Exclusion criteria

* Known hypersensitivity or allergy to medication required during the study (e.g., steroid, contrast media) * Coagulopathy, systemic infection, localized infection at needle-entry site, lumbar fracture, myelopathy, or severe organ dysfunction (e.g., renal failure, heart failure, severe respiratory diseases) * Comorbidities that compromise valid pain assessment (e.g., post-stroke, central neuropathy, malignancy) * Previous neurological deficits * Pregnancy * Refusal of participation in the study

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change from Baseline in the Numeric rating scale (NRS-11) at Follow UpBaseline (pre-intervention) through study completion, an average of 6 weeks.Zero is equivalent to no pain and 10 indicates the worst possible pain.
Change from Baseline in the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at Follow UpBaseline (pre-intervention) through study completion, an average of 6 weeks.The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) is determined by measuring the distance (in millimeters) from the patient's mark on a 100mm line to the left end of the line. The left endpoint is equivalent to no pain and right endpoint represents the worst imaginable pain.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change from Baseline in Oswestry's Disability Index Score at Follow UpBaseline (pre-intervention) through study completion, an average of 6 weeks.The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) was developed to evaluate the degree of disability associated with low back pain (LBP). An increase of 10% or more from the baseline ODI score is generally considered to indicate a clinically and statistically significant change in the patient's condition.
Change from Baseline in Serum Interleukin-6 at Follow UpBaseline (pre-intervention) through study completion, an average of 6 weeks.A reduction or maintenance of serum interleukin-6 levels from baseline at follow-up.

Other

MeasureTime frameDescription
Complication and Adverse EventFrom enrollment through study completion, an average of 6 weeks.Any complications or adverse events that occurred during the procedure or afterward up to the follow-up period.

Countries

Indonesia

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026