CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT02073292Updated Feb 23, 2023

Cooled Radiofrequency Ablation vs. Thermal Radiofrequency Ablation

An interventional study of c-RFA and tRFA in Chronic Thoracic Back Pain, sponsored by The Cleveland Clinic. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 90 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2023-02-23.

Sponsored by The Cleveland Clinic · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
16
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 90 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Nerves in your body transmit signals to and from your brain and the cells in your body. In the event of an injury or disease, these nerves transmit pain. Sometimes, when an injury doesn't heal, chronic pain can develop. One way to treat chronic pain is to interrupt these pain signals. One method of doing this is to use Radio frequency ablation (RFA).

Radio frequency ablation (RFA) is a medical procedure in which heat is generated from high frequency electrical current in order to lesion (burn) nervous tissue. Radiofrequency ablation is used to treat many conditions in several areas of the body including cardiac (heart) as well as chronic pain. Probes (needles) are inserted into the body to a specific location and the electrical current is passed through these needles. This electrical current creates heat in your body and forms small lesions or burns in a specific place. Doctors will use tools, such as fluoroscopy (x-rays) and injections to locate the specific nerves that are transmitting pain and then use the electrical current to destroy those nerves.

Equipment used include generator, built in nerve stimulator, different needles and probes and water cooling system in case of the cooled RFA.

There are several types of probes or needles that are used to transmit energy and create lesions. This study is going to compare 2 types - standard radiofrequency and 'cooled' radiofrequency. The only difference is that the 'cooled' radiofrequency probes have water running through the probe tip, which keeps the tip cool and allows a larger lesion to be made. Since the doctor can't actually see the nerve he is trying to target, the larger lesion should theoretically improve his chances of hitting it. The 'cooling' of the water also allows the temperatures to be lower than what is needed for standard RF. In this study, the investigators would like to compare the differences between standard RFA (90°C) and "cooled" RFA (60°C) ablation techniques and determine if one is better for pain relief.

All of the probes that are used to perform radiofrequency ablation are FDA approved and are commonly used to treat patients with chronic back pain.

Participating in the study involves being randomly assigned to received either standard or cooled RFA. The procedure for both standard and cooled RFA is basically the same. The only difference is with standard RFA, the doctor may perform up to 2 lesions, instead of 1 if they are using cooled RFA.

Both study groups will receive local anesthetic prior to procedure. The treating doctor will use a machine called a C-Arm to take x-rays. These x-rays will guide the doctor to be sure the probes are in the right place. Once the probe placement is confirmed, the doctor will turn on the generator and create the lesion. This process will be repeated depending on how many lesions need to be created.

After the procedure there will be follow up visits at 1, 3 and 6 months. Level of pain, health and recovery information will be collected.

02

Conditions studied

  • Chronic Thoracic Back Pain

Browse trials for

03

In context

Back Pain

2,373 studies on the registry are indexed under Back Pain; 284 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 16 is below the median of 60 across 1,941 interventional studies indexed under Back Pain.

Browse Back Pain studies →

Lead sponsor

The Cleveland Clinic is the lead sponsor of 818 studies on the registry; 118 are open to participants now.

Of its 89 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 72 (81%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 90 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Age 18 or older
  • Chronic thoracic spine mediated back pain of 3 months duration or longer
  • Absence of focal neurologic signs or symptoms related to thoracic radiculopathy
  • Failure to respond to conservative measures in the form of oral medication and physical therapy
  • More than 50% reduction in their pain less than 2 months duration following a series of 2 diagnostic thoracic medial branch blocks of the affected joints using 1 ml of 1% lidocaine in the first procedure and bupivacaine 0.5 % in the second time

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Untreated coagulopathy
  • Concomitant medical (e.g. uncontrolled cardiac condition) or psychiatric illness (e.g., untreated depression) likely to endanger the patient or compromise treatment outcomes
  • Pregnancy
  • Malignancy
  • Systemic or local infection
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Double (Participant, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
16 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    c-RFA

    cooled radiofrequency ablation

    Procedure: c-RFA

  • Active comparator
    t-RFA

    thermal radiofrequency ablation

    Procedure: tRFA

Interventions

  • Procedurec-RFA
  • ProceduretRFA
06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Pain Score on the visual analogue scale

    Time frame: Change from baseline in pain at 6 months

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Cleveland Clinic
    Cleveland, Ohio 44195, United States
08

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Feb 23, 2023, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
09

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT02073292
Lead sponsor
The Cleveland Clinic
Collaborators
Kimberly-Clark Corporation
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Feb 27, 2014
Start date
Mar 2014
Primary completion
Dec 15, 2022
Completion
Dec 15, 2022
Last update
Feb 23, 2023

Study contacts

Nagy Mekhail
principal investigator · The Cleveland Clinic

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Feb 2023. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion