Ultrasound-guided high-voltage vs conventional pulsed radiofrequency in elderly cervical radiculopathy: A randomized controlled trial

Abstract: Background: Elderly patients with cervical radiculopathy present therapeutic challenges owing to comorbidities and medication-related risks. Long-term pharmacotherapy and surgical interventions are often suboptimal, necessitating evaluation of optimized pulsed radiofrequency strategies under image guidance. Objectives: This superiority trial compared the efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided cervical nerve root high-voltage pulsed radiofrequency (HVP-PRF) versus conventional pulsed radiofrequency (C-PRF) for pain management in elderly patients with cervical radiculopathy. Methods: This single-center, parallel-group, assessor-blinded randomized controlled trial enrolled patients aged 60–85 years with cervical radiculopathy, randomly assigned (1:1) to HVP-PRF (70 V) or C-PRF (45 V). Procedures were performed under ultrasound guidance with sensory/motor stimulation confirmation and temperature ≤42°C. The primary outcome was change in upper-limb radiating pain on the Numeric Rating Scale (ΔNRS) from baseline to 3 months. Secondary outcomes included Neck Disability Index (NDI), neck pain NRS, Patient Global Impression of Change, responder rates, rescue analgesia use, and adverse events. Follow-up occurred at 1 week, 1, and 3 months. Results: A total of 104 patients were randomized and 101 received treatment. At 3 months, HVP-PRF demonstrated significantly greater radiating pain improvement versus C-PRF (adjusted mean difference 1.24, 95% CI 0.46–2.02, P=0.002). Functional improvement (NDI) was superior in the HVP-PRF group at 3 months (AMD 6.47, 95% CI 2.11–10.83, P=0.004). Responder rates (≥50% pain reduction) were higher with HVP-PRF at 3 months (68.75% vs. 42.22%, OR 3.01, P=0.011) and 6 months (65.22% vs. 43.18%, OR 2.52, P=0.035). Rescue analgesic use was lower in the HVP-PRF group during 1–3 months intervals (both P<0.05). Adverse event rates were comparable (27.45% vs. 32.00%). Conclusion: Under ultrasound visualization and electrical stimulation-based target confirmation with temperature control ≤42°C, HVP-PRF provided greater and more durable relief of upper limb radiating pain compared with C-PRF in elderly patients with cervical radiculopathy, with a comparable safety profile.