Bipolar RFA Versus Phenol Neurolysis for Knee Osteoarthritis Pain

Knee osteoarthritis (gonarthrosis) is a common cause of chronic knee pain and functional limitation, especially in older adults. Although conservative treatments such as physical therapy, oral analgesics, and intra-articular injections are commonly used, many patients continue to experience persistent pain and reduced quality of life. In recent years, minimally invasive genicular nerve interventions have become important alternatives for patients who do not achieve adequate benefit from conservative management or are not suitable candidates for surgery. Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of the genicular nerves has been shown to reduce pain and improve function in patients with chronic knee osteoarthritis. Bipolar radiofrequency ablation (BPRFA), which uses two closely positioned radiofrequency cannulas, may create larger lesions and provide broader denervation compared with conventional monopolar techniques. Phenol chemical neurolysis (PCN) is another minimally invasive treatment option that provides chemical denervation of the genicular nerves and may represent a simpler and more cost-effective alternative. However, concerns remain regarding the potential for unintended spread of phenol and procedure-related complications. The aim of this prospective observational comparative study is to compare the analgesic efficacy, functional outcomes, and safety profiles of ultrasound-guided BPRFA and PCN in patients with chronic knee osteoarthritis who are refractory to conservative treatment. Patients with chronic moderate-to-severe unilateral knee pain and radiologically confirmed osteoarthritis first undergo diagnostic genicular nerve block under ultrasound guidance. Patients who achieve significant pain relief after the diagnostic block subsequently receive either BPRFA or PCN as part of routine clinical practice. Pain severity and functional status are evaluated using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) at baseline and during follow-up visits at 4, 12, and 24 weeks after treatment. The study also compares treatment response rates and procedure-related adverse events between the two interventions.