# Clinical and radiological comparison of percutaneous cervical nucleoplasty combined with ultrasound-guided pulsed radiofrequency of cervical nerve root for cervical radicular pain: a retrospective, matched-cohort study

## TL;DR

This study compares a new treatment combining two procedures for cervical radicular pain and finds it more effective than one procedure alone.

## Contribution

The study introduces and evaluates a novel combination therapy for cervical radicular pain using PCN and PRF.

## Key findings

- The PCN + PRF group showed significantly better pain and function outcomes than the PRF-only group.
- The PCN + PRF group had a more pronounced decrease in disc height and increased range of motion compared to the PRF group.
- The combined treatment was found to be safe and effective for chronic cervical radicular pain.

## Abstract

The best treatment yielding clinical benefits was still equivocal and controversial for the treatment of cervical radicular pain (CRP). This study aimed to propose a novel combination strategy of percutaneous cervical nucleoplasty (PCN) and ultrasound-guided pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) of cervical nerve root for CRP, and to compare its therapeutic effects with PRF alone.

120 CRP patients who satisfied the inclusion requirements between January 2016 and March 2019 were retrospectively analyzed and split into PCN + PRF and PRF groups. The propensity score matching (PSM) technique was used to correct the imbalanced confounding variables between the groups. Then, clinical outcomes including the visual analog scale (VAS) score, Neck Disability Index (NDI) score, clinical assessment scale for cervical spondylosis (CASCS), modified MacNab criteria, radiological parameters, and complications were evaluated.

In all, 120 patients were used to calculate the propensity score, producing 26 matched pairs that were monitored for a minimum of a year. When compared to the preoperative data, both groups' neck pain VAS scores, arm pain VAS scores, NDI scores, and CASCS scores saw a significant improvement during the follow-up period (p < 0.001). However, patients in the PRF group noted higher neck pain VAS scores, arm pain VAS scores, NDI scores, and CASCS scores than those in the PRF + PCN group at the final follow-up (p < 0.05). The decrease in surgical level disc height was more pronounced in the PRF + PCN group at the final follow-up (P < 0.05). The ROM was reduced in the PRF group but increased in the PRF + PCN group at the final follow-up (P < 0.01). Based on the modified MacNab criteria, the PRF and PCN + PRF groups had excellent and good rates of 76.92% and 84.62%, respectively, with no statistically significant difference (P > 0.05).

We present and describe a novel strategy for the combined treatment of CRP in chronic cervical radicular pain using ultrasound-guided percutaneous disc radiofrequency ablation PCN and spinal nerve root pulse radiofrequency PRF, which is both effective and safe throughout the treatment process, reducing pain and improving function.