当代医学
噹代醫學
당대의학
CHINA CONTEMPORARY MEDICINE
2014年
6期
1-2,3
,共3页
邹聪%何云武%龙慧%李威%李晴
鄒聰%何雲武%龍慧%李威%李晴
추총%하운무%룡혜%리위%리청
脉冲射频%神经根阻滞%背根神经节%腰腿痛%神经性疼痛
脈遲射頻%神經根阻滯%揹根神經節%腰腿痛%神經性疼痛
맥충사빈%신경근조체%배근신경절%요퇴통%신경성동통
Pulsed radiofrequency%Nerve root blocked%Dorsal nerve root%Low back pain%Neuropathic pain
目的:观察背根神经节脉冲射频联合神经根阻滞治疗神经根性腰腿痛的临床疗效。方法对48例经保守治疗无效的神经根性腰腿痛患者,行背根神经节脉冲射频治疗联合神经根阻滞治疗。观察患者治疗前后3 d、1个月、6个月时疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)、Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI),并进行分析。结果术前VAS为(6.5±0.7)分,术后3 d、1个月和6个月的平均VAS分别为(2.3±0.6)分、(2.4±0.5)分和(2.5±0.8)分;与术前相比,术后3 d、1个月和6个月的VAS显著降低(P<0.05);术后3 d、1个月和6个月的VAS之间差异无统计学意义。术前ODI(%)为(60±6.0)%,术后3 d、1个月和6个月的ODI(%)分别为(18±6.0)%、(22±4.0)%和(25±3.0)%;与术前相比,术后3 d、1个月和6个月的ODI显著降低(P<0.05);术后3 d、1个月和6个月的ODI之间差异无统计学意义。所有患者治疗后无严重并发症。结论腰骶部背根神经节脉冲射频联合神经根阻滞治疗对神经根性疼痛有良好治疗作用,长期疗效需进一步研究。
目的:觀察揹根神經節脈遲射頻聯閤神經根阻滯治療神經根性腰腿痛的臨床療效。方法對48例經保守治療無效的神經根性腰腿痛患者,行揹根神經節脈遲射頻治療聯閤神經根阻滯治療。觀察患者治療前後3 d、1箇月、6箇月時疼痛視覺模擬評分(VAS)、Oswestry功能障礙指數(ODI),併進行分析。結果術前VAS為(6.5±0.7)分,術後3 d、1箇月和6箇月的平均VAS分彆為(2.3±0.6)分、(2.4±0.5)分和(2.5±0.8)分;與術前相比,術後3 d、1箇月和6箇月的VAS顯著降低(P<0.05);術後3 d、1箇月和6箇月的VAS之間差異無統計學意義。術前ODI(%)為(60±6.0)%,術後3 d、1箇月和6箇月的ODI(%)分彆為(18±6.0)%、(22±4.0)%和(25±3.0)%;與術前相比,術後3 d、1箇月和6箇月的ODI顯著降低(P<0.05);術後3 d、1箇月和6箇月的ODI之間差異無統計學意義。所有患者治療後無嚴重併髮癥。結論腰骶部揹根神經節脈遲射頻聯閤神經根阻滯治療對神經根性疼痛有良好治療作用,長期療效需進一步研究。
목적:관찰배근신경절맥충사빈연합신경근조체치료신경근성요퇴통적림상료효。방법대48례경보수치료무효적신경근성요퇴통환자,행배근신경절맥충사빈치료연합신경근조체치료。관찰환자치료전후3 d、1개월、6개월시동통시각모의평분(VAS)、Oswestry공능장애지수(ODI),병진행분석。결과술전VAS위(6.5±0.7)분,술후3 d、1개월화6개월적평균VAS분별위(2.3±0.6)분、(2.4±0.5)분화(2.5±0.8)분;여술전상비,술후3 d、1개월화6개월적VAS현저강저(P<0.05);술후3 d、1개월화6개월적VAS지간차이무통계학의의。술전ODI(%)위(60±6.0)%,술후3 d、1개월화6개월적ODI(%)분별위(18±6.0)%、(22±4.0)%화(25±3.0)%;여술전상비,술후3 d、1개월화6개월적ODI현저강저(P<0.05);술후3 d、1개월화6개월적ODI지간차이무통계학의의。소유환자치료후무엄중병발증。결론요저부배근신경절맥충사빈연합신경근조체치료대신경근성동통유량호치료작용,장기료효수진일보연구。
Objective To observe the efficacy of pulsed radiofrequency treatment of the lumbsacral dorsal nerve root combined nerve root block as a therapy to reduce symptomatic pain in patients with chronic spinal pain radiating to the leg. Methods In this retrospective study, 48 patients with radicular pain who have experienced conservative treatment were evaluated after undergoing pulsed radiofrequency treatment of the dorsal root combined nerve root blocked. Visual Analogue Scale(VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were recorded at the time of pre-treatment and 3 d.1 m. 6 m after the treatment. Results The VAS of pre-treatment and 3 days, 1 month and 6 months after the treatment were (6.5±0.7), (2.3 ±0.6), (2.4±0.5)and (2.5 ±0.8) respectively. There were significant difference in VAS compared with pre-treatment though no obvious difference in 3 days, 1 month and 6 months after the treatment. The ODI(%) of pre-treatment and 3 days, 1 month and 6 months after the treatment were (60±6.0)%,(18±6.0)%,(22±4.0)%and (25±3.0)%respectively. There were significant difference in ODI compared with pre-treatment (P<0.05), and no obvious difference in 3 days, 1 m and 6 m after the treatment. Conclusion Dorsal nerve root pulsed radiofrequency combined nerve root blocked in the treatment of in patients with chronic spinal pain that radiates to the leg appears to be useful and safe therapy. Future prospective studies need to be done for the long-term effects.