Evidence Hub

Effectiveness of distal versus proximal greater occipital nerve pulsed radiofrequency in migraine management: a prospective randomized controlled trial

G. Babaoğlu, Sukriye Dadali, Ülkü Sabuncu, E. Akçaboy, Şeref Çelik, M. Ayhan, Yağmur Can Dadakçi, M. Yilmaz et al.

Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences, 2025

30 participants · 5 citations

Abstract

Background/aim We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of distal versus proximal greater occipital nerve (GON) pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) treatments in patients with episodic or chronic migraine. Materials and methods In this prospective, randomized controlled study, sixty participants were randomized to either distal GON PRF (n = 30) or proximal GON PRF (n = 30). Migraine related assessments were conducted at the baseline and at the first, second, and third month. Results Baseline characteristics indicated a higher migraine burden in the proximal group, including increased monthly headache frequency (15.0 vs. 9.5 attacks, p = 0.007). Both groups experienced significant reductions in headache duration, severity and frequency over three months (Friedman test, p < 0.001). Notably, the proximal group experienced greater reductions in severe headache frequency at all time points (1st month: p = 0.004; 3rd month: p = 0.022) and total headache days by the third month (14.0 vs. 9.5 days, p = 0.039). The distal group exhibited some advantages in reducing headache severity (VAS), showing a trend toward improvement in the second month (p = 0.055) and achieving statistical significance by the third month (p = 0.011). No unexpected adverse effects were observed in either group. Conclusion Both treatments were well-tolerated, with minimal adverse effects. Our findings indicate that both proximal and distal approaches are safe and effective for migraine management. The proximal approach…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 30 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free