English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Dear Editor,It is interesting to read the paper by Koh et al. on the investigation of the pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) of the dorsal root ganglion (DRG) in patients of chronic lumbosacral radicular (CLR) pain [1]. It is noteworthy that the authors attempted to perform a controlled trial on a challenging topic. However, I am afraid that the study design, results, and conclusions have further “muddied the water” instead of bringing clarity to the existing evidence on the efficacy of PRF-DRG in CLR pain patients. I would like to highlight some aspects of the study, which decrease the confidence in their study results and conclusions.The study was conducted on patients of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). Note that LSS is a radiological diagnosis, and the clinical diagnosis of spinal stenosis and its symptoms (leg pain) bear no relation to the extent of corresponding imaging findings of either central or foraminal stenosis. However, generally patients with central stenosis present with neurogenic claudication, whereas lateral foraminal stenosis could cause symptoms similar to radicular elements of …

pain medicine

Investigating the Effects of Pulsed Radiofrequency on Dorsal Root Ganglion in Chronic Lumbar Radicular Pain Patients: Is It Not Important That We Ask the Right Question, the Right Way, on an Appropriate Sample of Patients?