Currently, nearly 1 million total knee arthroplasties (TKA) are performed yearly in the United States. Three million are projected to be performed in 2040. Between 15-30% of all patients who undergo TKA have continued pain, reduced quality of life and functional impairments that cannot be attributed to hardware failure/loosening or infection. Treatment options for persistent post TKA pain (failed TKA) are limited. There is a need for minimally invasive, and effective pain and disability modulating interventions for patients with failed TKA. Genicular radiofrequency ablation (GRFA) has been described, refined, and validated as an effective minimally invasive intervention to control refractory knee pain secondary to knee osteoarthritis (OA) as evidenced by three favorable meta-analyses published in 2021 alone.3-5 GRFA is a minimally invasive percutaneous procedure that utilizes thermal energy to coagulate nerves from the knee. Though sometimes used in practice, there is limited research describing and evaluating GRFA for patients with failed TKA. This will be the first trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of GRFA in patients with failed TKA using a robust study design and up-to-date, evidence-based selection criteria and technique.
The general objective of this study is to determine the safety and efficacy of GRFA in patients with failed TKA. The central hypothesis is that GRFA is safe and more efficacious in improving pain and function than sham GRFA. A triple blinded randomized sham-controlled trial design will be used. Patients with failed TKA will be recruited and randomized into either a thermal or sham GRFA group. Patient selection criteria and GRFA procedural technique will incorporate refinements based on expanded understanding from recent research. Outcomes will be assessed prior to and at 3, 6 and 12 months post-GRFA. The primary outcome measures will be between group difference in the change in pain (NRS) between pre- and 6 months post. Secondary outcomes will include safety and changes in function (WOMAC; sit-stand test; strength; range of motion \& balance), participants' impression of change, perceived need for revision arthroplasty, analgesic use, and quality-of-life. Crossover will be offered to participants in the sham group at 6 months post-treatment. Data will be analyzed using descriptive, linear mixed-effects model and Kaplan-Meier Survival Curve statistics. The proposed research is innovative and important as it uses a robust study design to evaluate the safety and efficacy of an emerging RFA intervention in a prevalent suffering patient population.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
TRIPLE
Enrollment
44
After the cannulae are placed and tines deployed, a single lesion (30 second ramp-up time; 80C x 2 minutes) will be made at each of the medial and lateral branches of the nerve to the vastus intermedialis, nerves to the vastus lateralis and medialis, recurrent fibular nerve, inferior medial genicular nerve. One bipolar strip lesion (intercannula distance 1.5 cm; anticipated strip lesion length 2.0 cm) at the superior medial and lateral genicular nerves will be made to accommodate anatomical variability.
After the cannulae are placed and tines deployed, a single lesion (no electrical signal applied to patient) will be made at each of the medial and lateral branches of the nerve to the vastus intermedialis, nerves to the vastus lateralis and medialis, recurrent fibular nerve, inferior medial genicular nerve. One bipolar strip lesion (intercannula distance 1.5 cm; anticipated strip lesion length 2.0 cm) at the superior medial and lateral genicular nerves will be made to accommodate anatomical variability.
Vivo Cura Health
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Average Pain Intensity Over the Prior week (0 - 10)
Numerical pain rating scale (0 - 10) with higher scores indicating a worse outcome
Time frame: 6 months
Change in pain intensity between pre- and 6-months post-intervention
Numerical Pain rating scale (NPRS) 6 month minus NPRS pre-intervention, with increased negative scores indicating a better outcome
Time frame: 6 months
Average Pain Intensity Over the Prior Week (0 - 10)
Numerical pain rating scale (0 - 10) with higher scores indicating worse outcomes
Time frame: 3 and 12-months post-intervention
Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC)
Measure of pain (0 - 20), stiffness (0 - 8) and physical function (0 - 68) with higher scores indicating wore pain, stiffness and functional limitations
Time frame: 3, 6 and 12-months post-intervention
The Clinical Global Impressions Scale (CGI)
Patient reported global impression of change (1 = Very Much Improved to 7 = Very Much Worse)
Time frame: 3, 6 and 12-months post-intervention
Safety - Adverse Events
Presence of self-reported complications
Time frame: 1-week, 3, 6 and 12-months post-intervention
Proportion of participants exceeding 50% pain relief
Proportion of participants that experience ≥ 50% pain relief
Time frame: 6 months
Proportion of participants exceeding Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) pain relief
Proportion of participants that experience MCID knee pain relief
Time frame: 6 months
Perceived Need for Revision Arthroplasty
"If revision surgery of your knee replacement was available to you, how interested would you be in having it at this time?" Y or N
Time frame: Baseline (Prior to), 3, 6 and 12-months post-intervention
Analgesic Use
Quantitative Analgesic Questionnaire
Time frame: Baseline (Prior to), 3, 6 and 12-months post-intervention
Health-related Quality of Life
EQ-5D-5L
Time frame: Baseline (Prior to), 3, 6 and 12-months post-intervention
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.