Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Monopolar Versus Bipolar Radiofrequency Ablation

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Essentials of Radiofrequency Ablation of the Spine and Joints

  • 771 Accesses

Abstract

The two most recognized forms of radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of chronic pain consist of monopolar RFA (MRFA) and bipolar RFA (BRFA). Although these two methods both utilize a magnetic field that is produced by a RF generator in order to lesion a neural target, they differ in both equipment required and their respective ability to enhance lesion size. The size of the RF lesion may impact both the efficacy and safety of the radiofrequency ablation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ball R. The science of conventional and water cooled monopolar lumbar radiofrequency rhizotomy: an electrical engineering point of view. Pain Physician. 2014;17:E 175–E211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Cosman ER, Dolensky JR, Hoffman RA. Factors that affect radiofrequency heat lesion size. Pain Med. 2014;15(12):2020–36. https://doi.org/10.1111/pme.12566. Epub 2014 Oct 14. PMID: 25312825.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Soloman M, Mekhail M, Mekhail N. Radiofrequency treatment in chronic pain. Expert Rev Neurother. 2010;10(3):469–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Smith HP, McWhorter JM, Challa VR. Radiofrequency neurolysis in a clinical model. Neuropathological correlation. J Neurosurg. 1981;55(2):246–53.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Toledo, Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Toledo, OH, USA

    Alexander Escobar

  2. Florida Spine & Pain Specialists, Tampa, Florida, USA

    Nomen Azeem

  3. The Spine and Nerve Center of the Virginias, Charleston, WV, USA

    Timothy R. Deer

Authors
  1. Alexander Escobar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nomen Azeem
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Timothy R. Deer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexander Escobar .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. The Spine and Nerve Center of the Virginias, Charleston, WV, USA

    Timothy R. Deer

  2. Florida Spine & Pain Specialists, Tampa, FL, USA

    Nomen Azeem

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Escobar, A., Azeem, N., Deer, T.R. (2021). Monopolar Versus Bipolar Radiofrequency Ablation. In: Deer, T.R., Azeem, N. (eds) Essentials of Radiofrequency Ablation of the Spine and Joints. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78032-6_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78032-6_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-78031-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-78032-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation