Submit
Search
Submit
Menu

  • Information

  • References

  • Contents

Academic Editor

  • Angela Vidal-Jordana

Download

  • [1]Chang MC. Efficacy of Pulsed Radiofrequency Stimulation in Patients with Peripheral Neuropathic Pain: A Narrative Review. Pain Physician. 2018; 21: E225–E234.

  • [2]Fang L, Ying S, Tao W, Lan M, Xiaotong Y, Nan J. 3D CT-guided pulsed radiofrequency treatment for trigeminal neuralgia. Pain Practice: The Official Journal of World Institute of Pain. 2014; 14: 16–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/papr.12041.

  • [3]Guo J, Dong X, Zhao X. Treatment of trigeminal neuralgia by radiofrequency of the Gasserian ganglion. Reviews in the Neurosciences. 2016; 27: 739–743. https://doi.org/10.1515/revneuro-2015-0065.

  • [4]Ojango C, Raguso M, Fiori R, Masala S. Pulse-dose radiofrequency treatment in pain management—initial experience. Skeletal Radiology. 2018; 47: 609–618. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-017-2854-8.

  • [5]Cheng JS, Lim DA, Chang EF, Barbaro NM. A Review of Percutaneous Treatments for Trigeminal Neuralgia. Operative Neurosurgery. 2014; 10: 25–33. https://doi.org/10.1227/NEU.00000000000001687.

  • [6]Salgado-López L, de Quintana-Schmidt C, Belvis Nieto R, Roig Arnall C, Rodríguez Rodriguez R, Álvarez Holzapfel MJ, et al. Efficacy of Sphenopalatine Ganglion Radiofrequency in Refractory Chronic Cluster Headache. World Neurosurgery. 2019; 122: e262–e269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2018.10.007.

  • [7]Li J, Ren H, Wang B, Wu D, Luo F. Multicentre, prospective, randomised, controlled, blinded-endpoint study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pterygopalatine ganglion pulsed radiofrequency treatment for cluster headache: study protocol. BMJ Open. 2019; 9: e026608. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026608.

  • [8]Orhurhu V, Huang L, Quispe RC, Khan F, Karri J, Urits I, et al. Use of Radiofrequency Ablation for the Management of Headache: A Systematic Review. Pain Physician. 2021; 24: E973–E987.

  • [9]Chua NHL, Vissers KC, Sluijter ME. Pulsed radiofrequency treatment in interventional pain management: mechanisms and potential indications—a review. Acta Neurochirurgica. 2011; 153: 763–771. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-010-0881-5.

  • [10]Narouze S, Kapural L, Casanova J, Mekhail N. Sphenopalatine Ganglion Radiofrequency Ablation for the Management of Chronic Cluster Headache. Headache: The Journal of Head and Face Pain. 2009; 49: 571–577. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1526-4610.2008.01226.x.

  • [11]Tepper SJ, Stillman MJ. Cluster Headache: Potential Options for Medically Refractory Patients (when all else Fails). Headache. 2013; 53: 1183–1190. https://doi.org/10.1111/head.12148.

  • [12]Lazzari ZT, Palmisani S, Hill B, Al‐Kaisy A, Lambru G. A prospective case series of sphenopalatine ganglion pulsed radiofrequency therapy for refractory chronic cluster headache. European Journal of Neurology. 2020; 27: 1190–1196. https://doi.org/10.1111/ene.14176.

  • [13]Bharti N, Sujith J, Singla N, Panda NB, Bala I. Radiofrequency Thermoablation of the Gasserian Ganglion Versus the Peripheral Branches of the Trigeminal Nerve for Treatment of Trigeminal Neuralgia: A Randomized, Control Trial. Pain Physician. 2019; 22: 147–154.

  • [14]Headache Classification Committee of the International Headache Society (IHS). The International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition. Cephalalgia: An International Journal of Headache. 2018; 38: 1–211. https://doi.org/10.1177/0333102417738202.

  • [15]Chiarotto A, Maxwell LJ, Ostelo RW, Boers M, Tugwell P, Terwee CB. Measurement Properties of Visual Analogue Scale, Numeric Rating Scale, and Pain Severity Subscale of the Brief Pain Inventory in Patients with Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review. The Journal of Pain. 2019; 20: 245–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpain.2018.07.009.

  • [16]Perrot S, Lantéri‐Minet M. Patients’ Global Impression of Change in the management of peripheral neuropathic pain: Clinical relevance and correlations in daily practice. European Journal of Pain. 2019; 23: 1117–1128. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejp.1378.

  • [17]Chen Z, Ren H, Zhao C, Luo F. Long‐term Outcomes of Computerized Tomography–Guided Sphenopalatine Ganglion–Targeted Pulsed Radiofrequency for Refractory Cluster Headache. Pain Practice. 2020; 20: 289–296. https://doi.org/10.1111/papr.12853.

  • [18]Zundert JV, Brabant S, de Kelft EV, Vercruyssen A, Buyten JV. Pulsed radiofrequency treatment of the Gasserian ganglion in patients with idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia. Pain. 2003; 104: 449–452. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3959(03)00066-6.

  • [19]Thapa D, Ahuja V, Dass C, Verma P. Management of refractory trigeminal neuralgia using extended duration pulsed radiofrequency application. Pain Physician. 2015;18: E433–E435.

  • [20]Yao P, Hong T, Zhu Y, Li H, Wang Z, Ding Y, et al. Efficacy and safety of continuous radiofrequency thermocoagulation plus pulsed radiofrequency for treatment of V1 trigeminal neuralgia. Medicine. 2016; 95: e5247. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000005247.

  • [21]Latorre G, González-García N, García-Ull J, González-Oria C, Porta-Etessam J, Molina FJ, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of trigeminal neuralgia: Consensus statement from the Spanish Society of Neurology’s Headache Study Group. Neurologia. 2023; 38: S37–S52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nrleng.2023.04.005. (En Español)

  • [22]Belvis R, Rodríguez R, Guasch M, Álvarez MJ, Molet J, Roig C. Efficacy and safety of surgical treatment of cluster headache. Medicina Clinica. 2020; 154: 75–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medcli.2019.03.023.

  • [23]Erdine S, Ozyalcin NS, Cimen A, Celik M, Talu GK, Disci R. Comparison of pulsed radiofrequency with conventional radiofrequency in the treatment of idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia. European Journal of Pain. 2007; 11: 309–313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpain.2006.04.001.

  • [24]Chua NHL, Vissers KC, Wilder‐Smith OH. Quantitative sensory testing may predict response to sphenopalatine ganglion pulsed radiofrequency treatment in cluster headaches: a case series. Pain Practice: The Official Journal of World Institute of Pain. 2011; 11: 439–445. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-2500.2010.00445.x.

Academic Editor

Article Metrics

  • Information

  • Download

  • Contents

Open Access 28 May 2026Original Article
EnglishSpanish
Effectiveness and Risk of Recurrence of Pulsed Radiofrequency in Trigeminal Neuralgia and Chronic Cluster Headache
Marta Domínguez 1, Alicia Gonzalez-Martinez 1, Sonia Quintas 1, Carmen Montero 2, Iris Fernández-Lázaro 1, Elena Rojo 3, Manuel Muñoz 3, Dolores Ochoa 3, Concepción Pérez 3, José Vivancos 1, Ana Beatriz Gago-Veiga 1,2,*
Affiliations
Article Info

1 Unidad de Cefaleas, Servicio de Neurología, Hospital Universitario de la Princesa Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria, Princesa (IIS-Princesa), 28006 Madrid, España

2 Departamento de Medicina, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, 28029 Madrid, España

3 Unidad del Dolor, Hospital Universitario de la Princesa Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria, Princesa (IIS-Princesa), 28006 Madrid, España

*Correspondence: dra.anagago@gmail.com (Ana Beatriz Gago-Veiga)

Abstract

Introduction:

Percutaneous pulsed radiofrequency (PPRF) is a minimally invasive neuromodulation technique used in chronic pain management. Our aim was to evaluate its effectiveness and safety in refractory cases of trigeminal neuralgia (TN) and chronic cluster headache (CH).
Methods:

We conducted a retrospective study of patients with TN and CH diagnosed according to the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition (ICHD-3) criteria and treated with PPRF (Gasserian ganglion for TN and sphenopalatine ganglion for CH) over an 8-year period. Effectiveness at 3 months was assessed by evaluating reduction in the number of pain days in TN and number of attacks in CH, ≥50% response rate, visual analogue scale (VAS), Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I), and pain recurrence.
Results:

Twenty-five patients met the inclusion criteria, including 19 with TN and 6 with CH, with a mean age of 76 and 52 years, respectively. Clinical improvement was observed in 14/19 (73.6%) patients with TN and 5/6 (83.3%) patients with CH. A ≥50% response rate was achieved in 11/14 (78.6%) patients with TN and 4/6 (66.7%) patients with CH. VAS scores decreased at 3 months in both groups (p < 0.0001 in TN; p = 0.06 in CH). PGI-I was rated as “better” or “much better” in 10/19 (52.6%) patients with TN and 5/6 (83.3%) patients with CH. Pain recurrence occurred in 13/14 (92.8%) patients with TN and 5/5 (100%) patients with CH, mainly after 1 year following the first procedure (7/13 TN and 2/5 CH). No major adverse events were reported.
Conclusions:

In our series, PPRF appears to be an effective and safe treatment for refractory TN and CH. Although the study is retrospective and the sample size is limited, particularly in CH, these findings should be considered preliminary but clinically relevant. Despite the high recurrence rate, given its low complication profile, it may represent a treatment option for patients who are not candidates for surgical procedures.

Graphical Abstract

null

Keywords

  • percutaneous pulsed radiofrequency
  • trigeminal neuralgia
  • cluster headache
  • refractory
  • recurrence

References

Publisher’s Note: IMR Press stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.