Comparison of Different Local Anaesthetics in Cervical Facet Medial Branch Blockade.

IF 1.9 4区医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY

World neurosurgery Pub Date : 2024-12-20 DOI:10.1016/j.wneu.2024.123585

Hanzade Aybüke Ünal, Ahmet Başarı, Güngör Enver Özgencil, Özgün Ömer Asiller, Başak Ceyda Meço

{"title":"Comparison of Different Local Anaesthetics in Cervical Facet Medial Branch Blockade.","authors":"Hanzade Aybüke Ünal, Ahmet Başarı, Güngör Enver Özgencil, Özgün Ömer Asiller, Başak Ceyda Meço","doi":"10.1016/j.wneu.2024.123585","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: Cervical medial branch blocks (CMBB) are frequently used for the treatment of facet arthropathy. The present study compares the effectiveness of lidocaine and prilocaine in CMBB procedures.Methods: Patients with facet arthropathy scheduled for CMBB were randomly divided into two groups who were administered a combination of 2 mg dexamethasone and either 1% lidocaine or 1% prilocaine with a total volume of 1 mL per level. All patients were assessed prior to the procedure (baseline), and at 1 hour, 1 week and 1 month after the procedure using the Numeric Rating Scale-11 (NRS-11), Neck Disability Index (NDI), and patient satisfaction was evaluated at 1 hour, 1 week and 1 month after the procedure.Results: A total of 97 patients were included in the study (n = 49 in the lidocaine group and n = 48 in the prilocaine group). A significant decrease was noted in the NRS-11 and NDI scores recorded during all follow-up assessments in both groups (p<0.001), while the NRS-11, NDI scores and patient satisfaction did not statistically differ between groups at 1 hour, 1 week and 1 month following the procedure (p˃0.05).Conclusion: CMMB achieved with either lidocaine or prilocaine decreased the recorded pain severity and disability scores to a similar degree. The selection of either lidocaine or prilocaine for CMBB is thus at the clinician's discretion.","PeriodicalId":23906,"journal":{"name":"World neurosurgery","volume":" ","pages":"123585"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World neurosurgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2024.123585","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Cervical medial branch blocks (CMBB) are frequently used for the treatment of facet arthropathy. The present study compares the effectiveness of lidocaine and prilocaine in CMBB procedures.

Methods: Patients with facet arthropathy scheduled for CMBB were randomly divided into two groups who were administered a combination of 2 mg dexamethasone and either 1% lidocaine or 1% prilocaine with a total volume of 1 mL per level. All patients were assessed prior to the procedure (baseline), and at 1 hour, 1 week and 1 month after the procedure using the Numeric Rating Scale-11 (NRS-11), Neck Disability Index (NDI), and patient satisfaction was evaluated at 1 hour, 1 week and 1 month after the procedure.

Results: A total of 97 patients were included in the study (n = 49 in the lidocaine group and n = 48 in the prilocaine group). A significant decrease was noted in the NRS-11 and NDI scores recorded during all follow-up assessments in both groups (p<0.001), while the NRS-11, NDI scores and patient satisfaction did not statistically differ between groups at 1 hour, 1 week and 1 month following the procedure (p˃0.05).

Conclusion: CMMB achieved with either lidocaine or prilocaine decreased the recorded pain severity and disability scores to a similar degree. The selection of either lidocaine or prilocaine for CMBB is thus at the clinician's discretion.

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

World neurosurgery CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-SURGERY

CiteScore

3.90

自引率

15.00%

发文量

1765

审稿时长

47 days

期刊介绍： World Neurosurgery has an open access mirror journal World Neurosurgery: X, sharing the same aims and scope, editorial team, submission system and rigorous peer review. The journal''s mission is to: -To provide a first-class international forum and a 2-way conduit for dialogue that is relevant to neurosurgeons and providers who care for neurosurgery patients. The categories of the exchanged information include clinical and basic science, as well as global information that provide social, political, educational, economic, cultural or societal insights and knowledge that are of significance and relevance to worldwide neurosurgery patient care. -To act as a primary intellectual catalyst for the stimulation of creativity, the creation of new knowledge, and the enhancement of quality neurosurgical care worldwide. -To provide a forum for communication that enriches the lives of all neurosurgeons and their colleagues; and, in so doing, enriches the lives of their patients. Topics to be addressed in World Neurosurgery include: EDUCATION, ECONOMICS, RESEARCH, POLITICS, HISTORY, CULTURE, CLINICAL SCIENCE, LABORATORY SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, OPERATIVE TECHNIQUES, CLINICAL IMAGES, VIDEOS