ClinicalTrials.gg
Not yet recruitingNCT07872527Updated Oct 16, 2026

Percutaneous Tenotomy Versus Radiofrequency Ablation for Rotator Cuff Tear - Related Pain.

An interventional study of Percutaneous tenotomy of the long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) and Ultrasound guided radiofrequency ablation of the suprascapular nerve in Rotator Cuff Tear and Pain Management, sponsored by Centre of Postgraduate Medical Education. Not yet recruiting. Open to participants aged 65 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-10-16.

Sponsored by Centre of Postgraduate Medical Education · Not applicable, Interventional, and Supportive care

Updated Oct 16, 2026Primary outcomes revisedNewly registeredGo to Updates ↓
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
60
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
65 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Rotator cuff tears are among the most common direct and indirect causes of chronic shoulder pain. Patients with irreparable rotator cuff tears face a choice of pain management options. The principal treatments available for chronic shoulder pain associated with irreparable rotator cuff tears include arthroscopic tenotomy of the long head of the biceps tendon, shoulder arthroplasty, pharmacological treatment, and radiofrequency ablation of the suprascapular nerve.

Arthroscopic tenotomy of the long head of the biceps tendon is an established treatment for pain associated with massive irreparable rotator cuff tears, as supported by the available literature.

Radiofrequency ablation of the suprascapular nerve provides temporary pain control by destroying the sensory nerve fibres supplying the shoulder joint.

Tenotomy of the long head of the biceps tendon can be performed safely using a minimally invasive, ultrasound-guided outpatient procedure under local anaesthesia, without the general anaesthesia required for arthroscopy.

The aim of the study is to compare the reduction in pain intensity and the duration of analgesia following percutaneous tenotomy of the long head of the biceps tendon versus continuous radiofrequency ablation of the suprascapular nerve. Changes in shoulder mobility limitations following the two procedures will also be compared using the Constant-Murley score, which assesses shoulder function.

Read the detailed description

Recruitment Participants will be recruited from patients attending the CMKP Pain Clinic who have been diagnosed with an inoperable rotator cuff tear. During their pain clinic visit, patients will receive information about the study and an informed consent form for participation in the clinical study. They will have the opportunity to ask questions and will receive comprehensive answers.

Randomisation and blinding

Patients will be randomly assigned to one of two groups:

  • LHBT group: ultrasound-guided percutaneous tenotomy of the long head of the biceps tendon will be performed.
  • CRF group: ultrasound-guided conventional radiofrequency ablation of the suprascapular nerve will be performed.

Randomisation will be performed using www.randomizer.org, with equal numbers of participants allocated to the two groups.

Blinding will be achieved by placing the randomisation number on the envelope containing the study documents. The research team member who assesses pain intensity and the Constant-Murley score before and after the procedure will not be involved in performing the procedures and will be unaware of the patient's group allocation.

Patient data will be recorded in a database protected against access by third parties. The data will include demographic and clinical characteristics (age, height, body weight, comorbidities, substance use, and analgesic doses), as well as procedural details (the selected technique and procedure duration).

Procedural management Percutaneous tenotomy of the long head of the biceps tendon LHBT

  1. Ultrasound will be used to identify the LHBT proximal to the pectoralis major tendon and the adjacent arterial vessels.
  2. The patient and ultrasound probe will be draped, and the patient's skin will be disinfected.
  3. A 10 mL Luer-lock syringe will be filled with 10 mL of 1% lidocaine, and an 18 G needle will be attached.
  4. Under continuous ultrasound guidance, the 18 G needle will be inserted into the LHBT sheath, where the local anaesthetic will be administered. The LHBT will then undergo repeated needle fenestration until tendon transection is visible or can be felt.
  5. The needle will be withdrawn.
  6. LHBT continuity will be reassessed using ultrasound. Ultrasound guided radiofrequency ablation of the suprascapular nerve
  7. Ultrasound will be used to identify the suprascapular notch, where the suprascapular nerve is located.
  8. The ultrasound probe will be draped, and the patient's skin will be disinfected.
  9. Under ultrasound guidance, a radiofrequency ablation needle with a 10 mm active tip will be advanced to the anatomical location of the nerve.
  10. Sensory and motor stimulation will be performed to confirm that the needle tip is immediately adjacent to the nerve.
  11. Local anaesthetic will be administered.
  12. Radiofrequency ablation will be performed at 80 °C for 60 seconds.
  13. The needle will be withdrawn.
  14. One millilitre of pentoxifylline, diluted 1:1 with normal saline, will be administered.

Assessment of pain and quality of recovery Pain intensity will be assessed using the numerical rating scale (NRS, 0-10) at predefined time points.

Range of motion and quality of recovery will be assessed using the validated Polish version of the Constant-Murley score at predefined time points.

6. Assessment time points Patients will be assessed before the procedure and at 1, 6, and 12 months after the procedure, using the NRS and the Constant-Murley score.

Assessment schedule: baseline (0 months), 1 month, 6 months, and 12 months. 7. Statistical analysis The collected data will be analysed using statistical methods appropriate for continuous and categorical variables. The distribution of continuous variables will be assessed using the Shapiro-Wilk test and graphical methods. Data will be presented as the mean ± standard deviation or the median and interquartile range, depending on their distribution. The primary analysis of the efficacy of the two interventions will use repeated measurements of the Constant-Murley score and NRS obtained before the procedure and at 1, 6, and 12 months. A linear mixed-effects model for repeated measurements will be fitted, including group, time, and the group × time interaction. If the assumptions for parametric analyses are not met, appropriate non-parametric methods will be used. Statistical significance will be defined as p \< 0.05.

The sample size was estimated for the primary endpoint, namely the between-group difference in the Constant-Murley score. Assuming a clinically important difference of 10 points, a significance level of α = 0.05, 80% power, a standard deviation of 15 points, and a potential loss to follow-up of 10%, the planned enrolment is 30 patients per group, for a total of 60 patients.

02

Conditions studied

  • Rotator Cuff Tear
  • Pain Management

Keywords

  • radiofrequency ablation
  • tenotomy
  • Constant-Murley score
  • rotator cuff tear
  • pain management
03

In context

Rotator Cuff Injuries

745 studies on the registry are indexed under Rotator Cuff Injuries; 163 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 60 is close to the median of 60 across 547 interventional studies indexed under Rotator Cuff Injuries.

Browse Rotator Cuff Injuries studies →

Lead sponsor

Centre of Postgraduate Medical Education is the lead sponsor of 46 studies on the registry; 10 are open to participants now.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
65 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Age >65 years.
  • Massive irreparable posterosuperior rotator cuff tears (Patte grade 3 and Goutallier grade 4 on MRI).

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Absence of consent to participate in the study.
  • Psychiatric disorders and antidepressant treatment.
  • Uncontrolled cardiovascular disease.
  • Alcohol or psychoactive substance dependence.
  • Active infection.
  • Known active malignancy.
  • A cardiac pacemaker (a relative contraindication to radiofrequency ablation).
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Supportive care
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
60 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Percutaneous tenotomy

    Ultrasound-guided percutaneous tenotomy of the long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) sheath.

    Procedure: Percutaneous tenotomy of the long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT)

  • Experimental
    Radiofrequency ablation

    Ultrasound guided radiofrequency ablation of the suprascapular nerve

    Procedure: Ultrasound guided radiofrequency ablation of the suprascapular nerve

Interventions

  • ProcedurePercutaneous tenotomy of the long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT)

    Under continuous ultrasound guidance, the 18 G needle will be inserted into the LHBT sheath, where the local anaesthetic will be administered. The LHBT will then undergo repeated needle fenestration until tendon transection is visible or can be felt. LHBT continuity will be reassessed using ultrasound.

  • ProcedureUltrasound guided radiofrequency ablation of the suprascapular nerve

    Under ultrasound guidance, a radiofrequency ablation needle with a 10 mm active tip will be advanced to the anatomical location of the nerve. Sensory and motor stimulation will be performed to confirm that the needle tip is immediately adjacent to the nerve. Radiofrequency ablation will be performed at 80 °C for 60 seconds.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Constant-Murley score at 1 month

    Shoulder function assessed with Constant-Murley score, a 100-point clinical scoring system used to evaluate overall shoulder function, where 100 points indicate best possible function and outcome and 0 stands for the worst possible function and outcome.

    Time frame: 1 month

Secondary outcomes

  1. Constant-Murley score at 6 months

    Shoulder function assessed with Constant-Murley score, a 100-point clinical scoring system used to evaluate overall shoulder function, where 100 points indicate best possible function and outcome and 0 stands for the worst possible function and outcome.

    Time frame: 6 months

  2. Constant-Murley score at 12 months

    Shoulder function assessed with Constant-Murley score, a 100-point clinical scoring system used to evaluate overall shoulder function, where 100 points indicate best possible function and outcome and 0 stands for the worst possible function and outcome.

    Time frame: 12 months

  3. Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at 1 month

    Pain intensity reported as Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) score, 0 - 10 points, where 0 points indicates no pain and 10 points stands for worst pain imaginable.

    Time frame: 1 month

  4. Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at 6 months

    Pain intensity reported as Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) score, 0 - 10 points, where 0 points indicates no pain and 10 points stands for worst pain imaginable.

    Time frame: 6 months

  5. Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at 12 months

    Pain intensity reported as Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) score, 0 - 10 points, where 0 points indicates no pain and 10 points stands for worst pain imaginable.

    Time frame: 12 months

  6. Change in NRS at 1 month

    The difference between baseline (pre-procedure) pain intensity and pain intensity 1 month following the procedure, reported as Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) scores, where 0 points indicates no pain and 10 points stands for worst pain imaginable.

    Time frame: 1 month

07

Study locations

No study locations are listed for this record.

08

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Undecided — I will identify and set the account for the study at one of the IPD repositories

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

09

Timeline

2 registry updates since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Start is estimated for Oct 2026; primary completion for Oct 2028, 24 months later.

Of 284 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Rotator Cuff Injuries, half reached primary completion within 17 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 7 and three quarters within 37. This study's planned 24 months is above that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 306 studies reached it within 19 months; a quarter within 9 and three quarters within 39.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Oct 7, 2026
First posted
Oct 13, 2026
StartEst.
Oct 2026
Primary completionEst.
Oct 2028
CompletionEst.
Oct 2029
Last update
Oct 16, 2026
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
Also revised
primary outcomes
Registered
First appeared on the registry
Oct 13, 2026
Show all 2 updates
  1. Oct 16, 2026
    Primary outcomes Revised (1 change)
    + 2 other changes: responsible party and secondary outcomes
  2. Oct 13, 2026
    First appeared on the registry

From the registry record's own update history. This site started tracking changes on Sep 25, 2026; for anything earlier, see the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07872527
Lead sponsor
Centre of Postgraduate Medical Education
Responsible party
Bartosz Horosz, MD (Clinical Professor, Principal Investigator, Centre of Postgraduate Medical Education) — Principal investigator
First posted
Oct 13, 2026
Start date
Oct 2026 (estimated)
Primary completion
Oct 2028 (estimated)
Completion
Oct 2029 (estimated)
Last update
Oct 16, 2026

Study contacts

Bartosz Horosz, MD
Contact
bhorosz@cmkp.edu.pl
0048225841122
Malgorzata Malec-Milewska, Prof
study chair · Medical Center of Postgraduate Education, Warsaw, Poland

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Oct 2026. 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