Comparison of Single- and Double-Level Radiofrequency Ablation for Chronic Coccydynia

Trial statusNot yet recruiting
Trial phaseNot applicable
Trial typeInterventional
Biological sexAll
Age18-75
SponsorMarmara University

About this trial

This study aims to compare two commonly used radiofrequency ablation (RFA) techniques for the treatment of chronic tailbone (coccyx) pain, also known as coccydynia. Chronic coccydynia can significantly impair daily activities and reduce quality of life, particularly in patients who do not respond adequately to conservative treatments. Participants in this study will be randomly assigned to receive either a single-level or double-level radiofrequency ablation (RFA) procedure targeting the coccygeal nerve pathways. These procedures are minimally invasive and are routinely performed in pain management practice. The primary objective of the study is to determine which technique provides superior pain relief and functional improvement. Patients will be followed for up to two months after the procedure, and pain intensity and quality of life will be evaluated using validated outcome measures. The results of this study may help optimize interventional treatment strategies for patients suffering from chronic coccydynia.

Eligibility criteria

Qualifiers

Patients with coccygeal pain lasting longer than 2 months

Patients who experienced significant pain relief (≥50% reduction) after a ganglion impar block performed within the last 6 months, but whose pain has subsequently recurred

Patients who provide informed consent to participate in the study

Disqualifiers

Acute coccydynia (pain duration less than 2 months)

Patients who did not achieve significant benefit (<50% pain reduction) from prior ganglion impar block

Patients with severe neurological or psychiatric disorders that impair communication or ability to follow instructions

Trial design

Treatments tested in this trial

  • Single-Level Ganglion Impar Radiofrequency Ablation
  • Double-Level Ganglion Impar Radiofrequency Ablation

Treatment groups

50 Participants
are divided into 2 treatment groups

Locations

This trial has no locations

Sponsors and collaborators