Comparison of ultrasound- and computed tomography-guided pulsed radiofrequency in treating ophthalmic branch postherpetic neuralgia: a retrospective study.

Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) Pub Date : 2024-11-11 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1590/1806-9282.20241004
Qianqian Shen, Bo Wang, Jianmin Yu, Jurong Xia
{"title":"Comparison of ultrasound- and computed tomography-guided pulsed radiofrequency in treating ophthalmic branch postherpetic neuralgia: a retrospective study.","authors":"Qianqian Shen, Bo Wang, Jianmin Yu, Jurong Xia","doi":"10.1590/1806-9282.20241004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety between ultrasound- and computed tomography-guided pulsed radiofrequency in treating ophthalmic branch postherpetic neuralgia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective study was conducted on data of 84 patients with ophthalmic branch postherpetic neuralgia. According to the puncture guiding method, the patients were divided into the ultrasound- and computed tomography-guided groups, which received the ultrasound- and computed tomography-guided supraorbital nerve pulsed radiofrequency treatment, respectively. The puncture time, numeric rating scale pain score before pulsed radiofrequency and after pulsed radiofrequency, effective rate of treatment, and intraoperative and postoperative adverse events were observed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The puncture time in the ultrasound-guided group was significantly shorter than that in the computed tomography-guided group (p<0.05). At 1, 4, and 12 weeks after pulsed radiofrequency, in two groups, the numeric rating scale pain score was significantly lower than that before pulsed radiofrequency, respectively (p<0.05). At each time, the numeric rating scale pain score showed no significant difference between the two groups (p>0.05). At 12 weeks after pulsed radiofrequency, there was no significant difference in the effective rate of treatment between the two groups (p>0.05). During the intraoperative and postoperative periods, the incidences of adverse event hematoma and oculocardiac reflex in the ultrasound-guided group were significantly lower than those in the computed tomography-guided group, respectively (p<0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both ultrasound- and computed tomography-guided supraorbital nerve pulsed radiofrequencys have good efficacy in treating the ophthalmic branch postherpetic neuralgia. Compared with the computed tomography-guided pulsed radiofrequency, the ultrasound-guided pulsed radiofrequency has faster puncture operation and is safer. It is more worthy of clinical applications.</p>","PeriodicalId":94194,"journal":{"name":"Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992)","volume":"70 11","pages":"e20241004"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11554317/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9282.20241004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety between ultrasound- and computed tomography-guided pulsed radiofrequency in treating ophthalmic branch postherpetic neuralgia.

Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on data of 84 patients with ophthalmic branch postherpetic neuralgia. According to the puncture guiding method, the patients were divided into the ultrasound- and computed tomography-guided groups, which received the ultrasound- and computed tomography-guided supraorbital nerve pulsed radiofrequency treatment, respectively. The puncture time, numeric rating scale pain score before pulsed radiofrequency and after pulsed radiofrequency, effective rate of treatment, and intraoperative and postoperative adverse events were observed.

Results: The puncture time in the ultrasound-guided group was significantly shorter than that in the computed tomography-guided group (p<0.05). At 1, 4, and 12 weeks after pulsed radiofrequency, in two groups, the numeric rating scale pain score was significantly lower than that before pulsed radiofrequency, respectively (p<0.05). At each time, the numeric rating scale pain score showed no significant difference between the two groups (p>0.05). At 12 weeks after pulsed radiofrequency, there was no significant difference in the effective rate of treatment between the two groups (p>0.05). During the intraoperative and postoperative periods, the incidences of adverse event hematoma and oculocardiac reflex in the ultrasound-guided group were significantly lower than those in the computed tomography-guided group, respectively (p<0.05).

Conclusions: Both ultrasound- and computed tomography-guided supraorbital nerve pulsed radiofrequencys have good efficacy in treating the ophthalmic branch postherpetic neuralgia. Compared with the computed tomography-guided pulsed radiofrequency, the ultrasound-guided pulsed radiofrequency has faster puncture operation and is safer. It is more worthy of clinical applications.

超声波和计算机断层扫描引导下脉冲射频治疗眼科带状疱疹后神经痛的比较:一项回顾性研究。
研究目的本研究旨在比较超声波和计算机断层扫描引导下脉冲射频治疗眼部带状疱疹后神经痛的疗效和安全性:方法:对84名眼科带状疱疹后遗神经痛患者的数据进行了回顾性研究。根据穿刺引导方法,将患者分为超声引导组和计算机断层扫描引导组,分别接受超声引导和计算机断层扫描引导的眶上神经脉冲射频治疗。观察穿刺时间、脉冲射频治疗前和脉冲射频治疗后的数字评分表疼痛评分、治疗有效率、术中和术后不良反应:结果:超声引导组的穿刺时间明显短于计算机断层扫描引导组(P0.05)。脉冲射频治疗 12 周后,两组治疗有效率无明显差异(P>0.05)。在术中和术后,超声引导组血肿和眼球反射不良事件的发生率分别明显低于计算机断层扫描引导组(P结论:超声波和计算机断层扫描引导下的眶上神经脉冲射频治疗在治疗眼支带状疱疹后神经痛方面均有良好疗效。与计算机断层扫描引导下的脉冲射频相比,超声引导下的脉冲射频穿刺操作更快、更安全。更值得临床应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信