RETROSPECTIVE OBSERVATIONAL STUDY TO EVALUATE THE
EFFICACY OF RADIOFREQUENCY IN THE TREATMENT OF
CHRONIC PHARMACORESISTANT LOW BACK PAIN
                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                     Corrente A.1, Luxardo N.2, Di Natale A.S.2, Fiore M.1, Pace M.C.1, Passavanti M.B.1, Pirolli R.1, Pota V.1, Sansone P.1, Schettini V.1,       Aurilio C.1 
1 Department of Women, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, Naples, Italy.
2 Department of Surgical Sciences, Anesthesia and Intensive Care, University of Turin, Azienda Ospedaliera Città della Salute e della   Scienza di Torino, Presidio Molinette, Turin, Italy.
.

Background and aims: Radiofrequency technique is a possible therapeutic strategy for chronic pharmacoresistant low back pain. This study compare the efficacy of continuous (CRF) and pulsed (PRF)
radiofrequency for this condition.
Methods: 120 patients with chronic pharmacoresistant low back pain were enrolled and treated with radiofrequency from January 2015 to May 2017 at our hospital. From the hospital database, the following
demographic information was collected: age, sex, etiology of pain, VAS value before treatment (table1). RF type depended on the etiology. The primary outcome was pain intensity (reduction ≥ 50% or ≥ 3 points of
VAS value) measured 1, 3 and 6 months after the intervention. Data analysis considered three variables: etiology, pain type and origin of pain.
Results: Efficacy of CRF in twenty-five spondyloarthrosis and axial nociceptive pain was 96% at 1, 3 months and 88% at 6 month (p<0.01); in spinal stenosis and disc herniation efficacy was greater for axial
nociceptive pain (100%, 80%, 80% and 91.6%, 83,3% 83,3% respectively) then neuropathic pain (p<;0,01). Efficacy of PRF in disc herniation was greater for radicular neuropathic pain (85,7% 78,6% 71,4%) as well as
in FBSS (66,6% 66,6% 50%), in spinal stenosis (71,4% 57,1% 35,7%) and in spinal stenosis with disc herniation ( 75% 50% 37,5%) (p<0,01), as showed in Table 2.
Conclusions: CRF and PRF don’t always have the same efficacy. To improve the response to treatment it is important to identify etiology, origin and type of pain for each patient.

Conflict of interest
The authors do not have competing interests to declare.

RETROSPECTIVE OBSERVATIONAL STUDY TO EVALUETE THE EFFICACY OF RADIOFREQUENCY IN THE TREATMENT OF CHRONIC PHARMACORESISTAN LOW BACK PAIN