1

Seminal Scientific Article

Describes the ideal lesion characteristics, device description, & lesion size of NIMBUS MEE

View Article
2

NIMBUS MEE for Lumbar RFA

Clinical advantages v. conventional technique, reducing procedure time by 50%

View Article
3

Other References

Comparison of Lesion Volumes & Shapes Produced with Cooled, Protruding, & Standard RFA

View Article
4

Monopolar Lesion Size & Shape

Characterizes the size & shape of the NIMBUS MEE lesion as 467 mm3

View Article
17

Angle of Insertion for Lumbar RFA

Parallel Placement is Technically Challenging - L4 was 31.04º ± 1.83º & L5 was 40.74º ± 1.86º

View Article
18

NIMBUS MEE v Standard Cannula

Muscle-Bone Interface in Ex-Vivo Model Comparison

View Article
16

Large Volume Lesion RFA for Genicular

Statistically significant decrease in pain intensity were observed at up to 24 months

View Article
19

Other References

Advanced Interventional Procedures for Knee Osteoarthritis

View Article
20

RFA for Infrapatellar Knee Pain

Image-guided technique for targeting the infrapatellar branch of the saphenous nerve

View Article
22

NIMBUS MEE for Genicular RFA

At a mean follow-up of 9.0 ± 1.5 months, 50.0% of participants reported ≥50% NRS reduction… and 56.3% reported PGIC scores ≥6

View Article
23

RFA for Greater Trochanteric Hip Pain

≥50% NPRS reduction was reported by 55.6% of participants” at a mean follow-up of 13.1 months, 70.4% reported a ≥2-point NPRS score reduction

View Article
2

NIMBUS MEE for Lumbar RFA

Clinical advantages v. conventional technique, reducing procedure time by 50%

View Article
5

NIMBUS MEE for Lumbar RFA

Perpendicular placement of NIMBUS MEE for lumbar MRI validated to be 601 mm3

View Article
10

NIMBUS MEE for Lumbar RFA

Coaxial (94 p.) to Multifidus Sparing (401 p.) Lumbar RFA with >56% of patients reporting positive outcome at 1 year

View Article
6

NIMBUS MEE for SIJ RFA

Bench science & post-procedure MRI validation of size & shape of strip lesion for SIJ RFA

View Article
7

NIMBUS MEE for SIJ RFA

Case report with MRI validating the size & shape of strip lesion for SIJ neurotomy

View Article
8

NIMBUS MEE for SIJ RFA

12 month outcomes in 182 patients utilizing NIMBUS MEE for SIJ RFA

View Article
9

NIMBUS MEE for SIJ RFA

SIJ innervation from S1–S3 LBs varies and benefits from a large-volume lesion

View Article
11

NIMBUS MEE for SIJ RFA

Significant pain reduction sustained up to 9 months with ultrasound-guided RFA using NIMBUS MEE

View Article
15

NIMBUS MEE for SIJ RFA

12 month outcomes in 182 patients utilizing NIMBUS MEE for SIJ RFA

View Article
21

Diagnostic & RFA Techniques for SIJ

Review of Sacral anatomy, diagnosis, & RFA techniques

View Article
1

Seminal Scientific Article

Ideal lesion characteristics, device description, & lesion size of NIMBUS MEE

View Article
2

NIMBUS MEE for Lumbar RFA

Clinical advantages v. conventional technique, reducing procedure time by 50%

View Article
3

Other References

Comparison of Lesion Volumes & Shapes Produced with Cooled, Protruding, & Standard RFA

View Article
4

Monopolar Lesion Size & Shape

Characterizes the size & shape of the NIMBUS MEE lesion as 467 mm3

View Article
7

NIMBUS MEE for SIJ RFA

Case report with MRI validating the size & shape of strip lesion for SIJ neurotomy

View Article
10

NIMBUS MEE for Lumbar RFA

Coaxial (94 p.) to Multifidus Sparing (401 p.) Lumbar RFA with >56% of patients reporting positive outcome at 1 year

View Article
13

Other References

Consensus Practice Guidelines on Interventions for Lumbar Facet Joint Pain from a Multispecialty, International Working Group

View Article
16

Large Volume Lesion RFA for Genicular

Statistically significant decrease in pain intensity were observed at up to 24 months

View Article
19

Other References

Advanced Interventional Procedures for Knee Osteoarthritis

View Article
22

NIMBUS MEE for Genicular RFA

At a mean follow-up of 9.0 ± 1.5 months, 50.0% of participants reported ≥50% NRS reduction… and 56.3% reported PGIC scores ≥6

View Article
22

NIMBUS MEE for Genicular RFA

At a mean follow-up of 9.0 ± 1.5 months, 50.0% of participants reported ≥50% NRS reduction… and 56.3% reported PGIC scores ≥6

View Article
5

NIMBUS MEE for Lumbar RFA

Perpendicular placement of NIMBUS MEE for lumbar MRI validated to be 601 mm3

View Article
8

NIMBUS MEE for SIJ RFA

12 month outcomes in 182 patients utilizing NIMBUS MEE for SIJ RFA

View Article
11

NIMBUS MEE for SIJ RFA

Significant pain reduction sustained up to 9 months with ultrasound-guided RFA using NIMBUS MEE

View Article
14

ASPN Updated Guidelines for RFA

Supports either multiple lesions or large volume lesion

View Article
17

Angle of Insertion for Lumbar RFA

Parallel Placement is Technically Challenging - L4 was 31.04º ± 1.83º & L5 was 40.74º ± 1.86º

View Article
20

RFA for Infrapatellar Knee Pain

Image-guided technique for targeting the infrapatellar branch of the saphenous nerve

View Article
23

RFA for Greater Trochanteric Hip Pain

≥50% NPRS reduction was reported by 55.6% of participants” at a mean follow-up of 13.1 months, 70.4% reported a ≥2-point NPRS score reduction

View Article
6

NIMBUS MEE for SIJ RFA

Bench science & post-procedure MRI validation of size & shape of strip lesion for SIJ RFA

View Article
9

NIMBUS MEE for SIJ RFA

SIJ innervation from S1–S3 LBs varies and benefits from a large-volume lesion

View Article
12

History of RFA Neurotomy

Advancements in RF technology, including NIMBUS Multitined Expandable Electrode

View Article
15

NIMBUS MEE for SIJ RFA

12 month outcomes in 182 patients utilizing NIMBUS MEE for SIJ RFA

View Article
18

NIMBUS MEE v Standard Cannula

Muscle-Bone Interface in Ex-Vivo Model Comparison

View Article
21

Diagnostic & RFA Techniques for SIJ

Review of Sacral anatomy, diagnosis, & RFA techniques

View Article
24

RFA for Genicular Pain

Larger lesions increase the likelihood of capturing the targeted structure

View Article
13

Other References

Consensus Practice Guidelines on Interventions for Lumbar Facet Joint Pain from a Multispecialty, International Working Group

View Article
14

ASPN Updated Guidelines for RFA

Supports either multiple lesions or large volume lesion

View Article

Background:

Radiofrequency neurotomy (RFN) can be an effective treatment for patients with chronic neck pain and cervicogenic headaches resistant to conservative care. However, the degree and duration of pain relief after RFN is dependent upon the thoroughness of target nerve coagulation.

Case Report:

This is a case of a 37-year-old patient with debilitating neck pain and headaches following a motor vehicle accident. Successful local anesthetic block of the third occipital nerve (TON) confirmed pain of C2-C3 facet joint origin. An initial RFN treatment of the TON, using standard 18G electrodes in bipolar mode, resulted in complete symptom amelioration for 8 months. Repeat RFN, using the same electrode configuration, was unsuccessful in alleviating the severe neck pain and headaches, and produced no demonstrable sensory loss in the distribution of the TON. RFN was then performed using the NIMBUS® electrosurgical RF multitined expandable electrode, which provides a larger zone of coagulation in volume than standard RFN electrodes even when used in bipolar configuration.

Conclusion:

The NIMBUS procedure resulted in successful coagulation of the TON with sensory loss in the TON distribution and reinstatement of palliative relief.