Comparative Effectiveness of Two Different Approaches to Radiofrequency Ablation of Lumbar Medial Branch Nerves

NCT ID: NCT06283628

Last Updated: 2026-01-09

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

NOT_YET_RECRUITING

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

25 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2026-01-31

Study Completion Date

2026-12-30

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The purpose of this voluntary research study is to determine whether the parasagittal approach to lumbar medial branch (LMB) nerve radio frequency ablation (RFA) will have greater efficacy than the traditional approach to lumbar medial branch nerve radio frequency ablation.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

To determine whether the parasagittal approach to lumbar medial branch (LMB) nerve radiofrequency ablation (RFA) will have greater efficacy than the traditional approach to lumbar medial branch nerve radiofrequency ablation.

This will be accomplished by comparing the results between the newly proposed parasagittal approach and the traditional approach of medial branch RFA done on the same patient (different sites) with bilateral low back pain (LBP).

Traditional approach:

The electrode is introduced at a 15-20 degrees' ipsilateral oblique angle to the sagittal plane toward the junction of the superior articular process (SAP) and transverse process (TP) of the vertebral body to target the traversing medial branch nerve. The reason for the proposed angle is to avoid the mamillo-accessory ligament (MAL) that may be ossified in up to 10% of the normal spine and, in such cases, potentially prevent proper coagulation of the medial branch nerve during the RFA procedure.

Parasagittal (new) approach:

Recently, Tran et al. showed that MAL is located more dorsally than it was thought earlier and, therefore, can't interfere with nerve coagulation during the RFA. Consequently, they proposed abandoning the 20-degree angle used for the traditional approach and placing the radiofrequency cannula parasagittally and more dorsally. It is proposed that, in order to achieve maximum nerve coagulation, the electrode should be placed as parallel to the nerve as possible, and placing it parasagittally helps achieve this goal. The remainder of the procedure does not differ from the traditional method.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Lumbar Spondylosis

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

The subjects with bilateral low back pain will undergo radiofrequency ablation of the lumbar medial branch nerves using one approach (traditional) on one side and different approach (parasagittal) on the other side. One arm will use the traditional approach on the left and the parasagittal approach on the right. The other arm will use parasagittal approach on the left and the traditional approach on the right,
Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

DOUBLE

Participants Outcome Assessors
We will do computer randomization for the sides for each approach for all the subjects. The subjects will be assigned numbers, and the particular procedural approach for each side will be concealed in the numbered envelopes. The numbers on the envelopes will correspond to the numbers assigned to the patients. The envelopes will be opened by a treating physician in the procedure room. The patient and the assessor (who will not be the treating physician) will not know which procedural approach was used for the sides.

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Subjects with traditional approach on the right side and parasagittal approach on the left side.

Patients will undergo bilateral RFA; the right side will be done following the traditional approach, and the left side will be done following the parasagittal approach. Traditional approach is done by placing the electrode at a 20 degrees' ipsilateral oblique angle to the sagittal plane toward the junction of the superior articular process and transverse process of the vertebral body to target the traversing medial branch nerve. The reason for the proposed angle is to avoid the mamillo-accessory ligament that may be ossified in up to 10% of the normal spine and potentially prevent proper coagulation of the medial branch nerve during the RFA procedure. Parasagittal (new) approach: is performed by placing the RF cannula parasagittally and more dorsally. To achieve maximum nerve coagulation, the electrode should be placed as parallel to the nerve as possible, and placing it parasagittally helps achieve this goal. The remainder of the procedure does not differ from the traditional method.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Radiofrequency ablation of lumbar medial branch nerves.

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Traditional approach:

The electrode is introduced at a 15-20 degrees' ipsilateral oblique angle to the sagittal plane toward the junction of the superior articular process (SAP) and transverse process (TP) of the vertebral body to target the traversing medial branch nerve.

Parasagittal (new) approach:

The RF cannula is placed parasagittally and more dorsally. The remainder of the procedure does not differ from the traditional method.

Subjects with traditional approach on the left side and parasagittal approach on the right side.

Patients will undergo bilateral RFA; the left side will be done following the traditional approach, and the right side will be done following the parasagittal approach. Traditional approach is done by placing the electrode at a 20 degrees' ipsilateral oblique angle to the sagittal plane toward the junction of the superior articular process and transverse process of the vertebral body to target the traversing medial branch nerve. The reason for the proposed angle is to avoid the mamillo-accessory ligament that may be ossified in up to 10% of the normal spine and potentially prevent proper coagulation of the medial branch nerve during the RFA procedure. Parasagittal (new) approach: is performed by placing the RF cannula parasagittally and more dorsally. To achieve maximum nerve coagulation, the electrode should be placed as parallel to the nerve as possible, and placing it parasagittally helps achieve this goal. The remainder of the procedure does not differ from the traditional method.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Radiofrequency ablation of lumbar medial branch nerves.

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Traditional approach:

The electrode is introduced at a 15-20 degrees' ipsilateral oblique angle to the sagittal plane toward the junction of the superior articular process (SAP) and transverse process (TP) of the vertebral body to target the traversing medial branch nerve.

Parasagittal (new) approach:

The RF cannula is placed parasagittally and more dorsally. The remainder of the procedure does not differ from the traditional method.

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Radiofrequency ablation of lumbar medial branch nerves.

Traditional approach:

The electrode is introduced at a 15-20 degrees' ipsilateral oblique angle to the sagittal plane toward the junction of the superior articular process (SAP) and transverse process (TP) of the vertebral body to target the traversing medial branch nerve.

Parasagittal (new) approach:

The RF cannula is placed parasagittally and more dorsally. The remainder of the procedure does not differ from the traditional method.

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

1. Bilateral equally intense axial low back pain
2. Pain duration of ≥ 6 months
3. Three-day average NRS scores of ≥ 3/10
4. Age greater than 18 years
5. Failure of conservative treatment, including nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medications and physical therapy
6. Positive response to a series of two bilateral diagnostic lumbar medial branch nerve blocks (≥ 80% pain relief). This is the current standard of care.

Exclusion Criteria

1. Radicular pain below the knee
2. Systemic infection or localized infection at the anticipated introducer entry site
3. Pregnancy
4. Allergy to Lidocaine
5. Bleeding dyscrasias
6. Patients unable to give informed consent
7. History of lumbar spine surgery at the affected levels
8. History of previous bilateral lumbar RFA of medial branches within the past six months.
9. Significant comorbid somatization or widespread pain with central sensitization
10. Secondary gain identified due to ongoing legal proceedings or worker's compensation
11. Cognitive impairment
12. Any pre-existing condition at the discretion of the provider that may confound interpretation of results -
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Milton S. Hershey Medical Center

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Bunty Shah

Associate Professor, Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Yakov Vorobeychik, MD PhD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Professor, Department of Anesthesiology

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Penn State Hershey College of Medicine

Hershey, Pennsylvania, United States

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United States

Central Contacts

Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.

Nancy Ruth Jarbadan, BS

Role: CONTACT

717-531-6135

Facility Contacts

Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.

Nancy Ruth Jarbadan, BS

Role: primary

717-531-6135

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

STUDY00023737

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

LUMBAR & SACROILIAC FUSION STUDY
NCT07204288 RECRUITING NA