Talk:Radiofrequency ablation

message: I just borrowed some text from atrial fibrillation to start this stub. As I have more time I will add to it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DocJohnny (talk • contribs) 01:30, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: start

message: I've added a fair amount of information about RF and how it is used to treat sleep apnea. Feel free to let me know what you think! I am also wondering where I could go to get a few relevant pictures. Any suggestions? Thanks again. DrDillard (talk) 20:46, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: RFA & Obstructive Sleep Apnea Treatment

message: I hesitate to delete references to RF "current" as opposed to low-frequency AC or DC current, because I'm not certain they're totally wrong. But RF is "waves," aka electromagnetic energy (the same spectrum as visible light, UV and infrared), and not electricity or current of any sort. Maybe the author is referring to the fact that the RF is generated electrically, even though no electricity is delivered to the patient; conceivably, that's somehow relevant here. But the fact that AC electric current also has "frequency" (e.g., US house current is 60 cycles per second) is irrelevant to "radiofrequency" energy. Anyhow, I hope someone who's certain will change "current" to "waves" and not worry about the frequency of the radio waves (presumably, many kilohertz or megahertz, but irrelevant to elecricity).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.249.196.188 (talk) 20:52, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  RF vs. AC or DC 

message: I removed the following sentence since it did not make sense to me. Catheters are often inserted through the groins and neck pain usally lasts from 1-6 weeks after. 
It is true that RFA is usually performed through introducers inserted in the groin (femoral vein usually) or sometimes the internal jugular, Neither usually causes neck pain. And as far as my medical knowledge extends, most people only have one groin. --JohnDO|Speak your mind 05:20, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I had the procedure done and I guess the neck pain will result from having to lie flat for 4-6 hours with the head flat on the pillow immediately after the procedure, but of course that's not direct.--Exander 03:47, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Groins 

message: Q, how often can RFA be performed and does it leave any lasting adverse effects?
I had RFA performed more than a year ago and it provided significant pain relief for 4-5 weeks.  Because it was the only procedure that has provided relief I wish to have it again.  My pain management doctor has agreed to perform the procedure again but says it can only be done once every six months. Q, is the once every six months for medical reasons or insurance (Medicare and an AARP supplement) reasons?
Also, are there any adverse effects from RFA like additional scarring or anything else.
Thank you in advance for any light which can be shed on my Qs, particularly the frequency issue. Benzman1 (talk) 19:21, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  RFA FREQUENCY and ADVERSE RESULTS 

message: Going by Google, "radiofrequency" is by far more common. However, I have seen multiple doctors write it as "radial frequency". Any true experts that can clear this up?
-- "Radial frequency" is nonsense.  I'm a medical malpractice litigator who has usually found, upon questioning at depositions, that errors like that in what doctors "write" are due to transcriptionist error.  In this case, they'd think they hear "radial" because it's more common in medicine than "radio," so they'd write it wrong.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.249.196.188 (talk) 20:20, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Radiofrequency" or "Radial Frequency"? 

message: I saw an article concerning RFA for Barrett's Esophagus, and one thing it mentions as a counter-indication is if the patient has previously had radiation treatment.  Does that then mean that this is also a form of radiation treatment, and if so what sort of risks exist?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.45.169.2 (talk) 17:30, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Radiation? 

message: The introduction mentions that the main advantage of RF ablation over other types of electrical ablation is that it, "does not directly stimulate nerves or heart muscle." I've read a number of journal articles on the subject and that same concept is often referred to as frequencies that are 'non-physiological'. However, I've yet to come across anything that explains why electrical signals in that range of frequencies don't stimulate tissue. Are there any research articles that explain the mechanism by which these (relatively) high frequency signals no longer stimulate muscles and nerves? I think this would complement the article nicely to be able to explain (briefly) why that happens instead of simply saying that it does.
I suspect that what's happening is that polarity of the electrical signal is changing too quickly for the voltage gated ion channels to keep up with it. Those channels open and close when an electromagnetic field around them distorts the shape of the channel. Presumably, that distortion takes a certain amount of time for the channel to change from one position to another and if the period of the signal was less than the time it took the channel to change positions (i.e. the frequency was sufficiently high) then it would make sense that the channel never actually makes it to the changed position. That mismatch between signal period and cell response time would explain why the frequencies used in RF ablation (and other RF applications) don't stimulate muscles and nerves. Having said all that, I'm really just making an educated guess so it would be good to know if there are any actual articles on the subject to figure out if I'm on to something or just blowing smoke. J.michael7 (talk) 14:42, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Basis of Non-Physiological Frequency 

message: Please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Medicine#Surgical_procedures_and_instruments:_Electrosurgery_and_Radiofrequency_ablation Jytdog Jytdog (talk) 18:32, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Electrosurgery]] and Radiofrequency ablation 

message: I suggest we move this page to "radio frequency ablation".
:Riventree (talk) 13:48, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  There is no word "radiofrequency". It's "radio frequency". 

message: The sub-section Pain Management in its first sentence refers the reader to a separate page discussing rhizotomy (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhizotomy) which then advises readers seeking information on Facet Rhizotomy to follow the embedded Wikipedia reference to that topic, which automatically sends the reader directly back to the Pain Management topic here. 
A direct search for Facet Rhizotomy refers the reader back to the main topic Radiofrequency Ablation. 
I came across this fairly minor issue while seeking “starter” information for personal use, and I’m not qualified to offer meaningful content suggestions in this field.
It feels however, almost like there may have been a discussion/plan/attempt at separating Facet Rhizotomy from both Radiofrequency Ablation and Pain Management, but it’s either been decided against or not completed.
I’ve not made any edits as this is a highly technical medical field in which I’m not qualified to recognise anything past the circular/awkward reference noted here. 203.214.87.168 (talk) 06:37, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pain management