Table 2

Percentage of patients with ≥30% and ≥50% pain reduction after conventional and cooled RF treatment

OAPPSPWhole group
Conv RF, n (%)Cooled RF, n (%)P value* †Conv RF, n (%)Cooled RF, n (%)P value† ‡Conv RF, n (%)Cooled RF, n (%)P value† §
≥50% pain reduction compared with baseline
 1 month5/12 (41.7)6/12 (50)1.002/12 (16.7)3/12 (25)1.007/24 (29.2)9/24 (37.5)0.54
 3 months3/12 (25)4/12 (33.3)1.001/11 (9.1)4/12 (33.3)0.324/23 (17.4)8/24 (33.3)0.21
 6 months3/11 (27.3)4/12 (33.3)1.001/11 (9.1)5/12 (41.7)0.164/22 (18.2)9/24 (37.5)0.15
≥30% pain reduction compared with baseline
 1 month6/12 (50)7/12 (58.3)0.684/12 (33.3)6/12 (50)0.4110/24 (41.7)13/24 (54.2)0.39
 3 months5/12 (41.7)8/12 (66.7)0.222/11 (18.2)6/12 (50)0.197/23 (30.4)14/24 (58.3)0.05
 6 months4/11 (36.4)5/12 (41.7)1.001/11 (9.1)5/12 (41.7)0.165/22 (22.7)10/24 (41.7)0.17
  • *P value compares conventional RF versus cooled RF procedure in the OA group.

  • †Pearson’s χ2 test used to compare proportions.

  • ‡P value compares conventional RF versus cooled RF procedure in the PPSP group.

  • §P value compares conventional RF versus cooled RF procedure in the whole population.

  • OA, osteoarthritis; PPSP, persistent postsurgical pain; RF, radiofrequency ablation.