Although the eventual focus of this position paper is on a procedure known as “pulsed RF,” its earlier parts cover issues of terminology and an overview of other applications of radiofrequency (RF) current in Pain Medicine. Each of these preliminary matters is germane to the eventual consideration of “pulsed RF.” Terminology is important because confusion can arise when uninformed individuals mistake certain procedures with others because they share the term—radiofrequency; and there is evidence that such confusion has arisen. Considering other clinical applications of RF current is important because it establishes benchmarks against which the evolution and present status of “pulsed RF” can be compared. On the one hand, there have been procedures that have withstood scientific scrutiny. On the other hand, there have been procedures that have been promoted enthusiastically only to be refuted once strict scientific studies have been conducted. The question that arises is where “pulsed RF” lies in this spectrum. This article addresses the current status of “pulsed RF” on the strength of available basic science and clinical literature.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nikolai Bogduk (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: