背部手术失败综合征翻修手术与射频治疗的早期临床效果比较研究

Se-Heum Park, Junseok W. Hur, Jang-Bo Lee, J. Park
{"title":"背部手术失败综合征翻修手术与射频治疗的早期临床效果比较研究","authors":"Se-Heum Park, Junseok W. Hur, Jang-Bo Lee, J. Park","doi":"10.35353/ajp.2021.00017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: Intractable back pain and radicular pain after lumbosacral spine surgery are challenges for surgeons because the pathophysiology of failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) remains unknown. Various medications, exercise, reoperation, spinal cord stimulation, and various interventional treatments, such as epidural injection, and radiofrequency treatment, have been suggested as treatment options. However, the clinical outcomes for each treatment are unclear. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated clinical outcomes of consecutive FBSS patients who underwent revision operation or radiofrequency treatment from 2014 to 2017, who previously showed response to nerve block. Pain was analyzed preoperatively and 1 month, 6 months, and 12 months postoperatively using a visual analogue scale (VAS). Short Form 36 (SF-36) health survey and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were assessed preoperatively and 12 months postoperatively. Results: A total of 70 patients was included in the present study (33 males, 37 females). When comparing preoperative and postoperative 12-month results, back pain VAS score decreased from 5.5 to 4.2 for revision operation and from 5.1 to 4.7 for radiofrequency treatment. Leg pain VAS score decreased from 6.5 to 4.02 for revision operation and 6.2 to 4.3 for radiofrequency treatment. ODI score decreased from 70.9 to 36.1 for revision operation and 70.2 to 36.1 for radiofrequency treatment. SF-36 score increased from 28.9 to 64.1 for revision operation and from 29.6 to 59.6 for radiofrequency treatment. Differences between treatments were not statistically significant after 12 months (p>0.05) but were at 1 month (p=0.01). Conclusion: Compared with revision operation, radiofrequency treatment is not inferior on early clinical outcome (up to 1 year following the treatment) in terms of pain relief, functional capacity, patient satisfaction, and quality of life in patients with FBSS. Radiofrequency treatment can be considered in patients who are not good candidates for surgical treatment based on imaging results or underlying diseases and who are responsive to diagnostic/therapeutic nerve blocks.","PeriodicalId":219852,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Pain","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Early Clinical Outcome of Comparative Study between Revision Operation and Radiofrequency Treatment for Management of Failed Back Surgery Syndrome\",\"authors\":\"Se-Heum Park, Junseok W. Hur, Jang-Bo Lee, J. Park\",\"doi\":\"10.35353/ajp.2021.00017\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: Intractable back pain and radicular pain after lumbosacral spine surgery are challenges for surgeons because the pathophysiology of failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) remains unknown. Various medications, exercise, reoperation, spinal cord stimulation, and various interventional treatments, such as epidural injection, and radiofrequency treatment, have been suggested as treatment options. However, the clinical outcomes for each treatment are unclear. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated clinical outcomes of consecutive FBSS patients who underwent revision operation or radiofrequency treatment from 2014 to 2017, who previously showed response to nerve block. Pain was analyzed preoperatively and 1 month, 6 months, and 12 months postoperatively using a visual analogue scale (VAS). Short Form 36 (SF-36) health survey and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were assessed preoperatively and 12 months postoperatively. Results: A total of 70 patients was included in the present study (33 males, 37 females). When comparing preoperative and postoperative 12-month results, back pain VAS score decreased from 5.5 to 4.2 for revision operation and from 5.1 to 4.7 for radiofrequency treatment. Leg pain VAS score decreased from 6.5 to 4.02 for revision operation and 6.2 to 4.3 for radiofrequency treatment. ODI score decreased from 70.9 to 36.1 for revision operation and 70.2 to 36.1 for radiofrequency treatment. SF-36 score increased from 28.9 to 64.1 for revision operation and from 29.6 to 59.6 for radiofrequency treatment. Differences between treatments were not statistically significant after 12 months (p>0.05) but were at 1 month (p=0.01). Conclusion: Compared with revision operation, radiofrequency treatment is not inferior on early clinical outcome (up to 1 year following the treatment) in terms of pain relief, functional capacity, patient satisfaction, and quality of life in patients with FBSS. Radiofrequency treatment can be considered in patients who are not good candidates for surgical treatment based on imaging results or underlying diseases and who are responsive to diagnostic/therapeutic nerve blocks.\",\"PeriodicalId\":219852,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian Journal of Pain\",\"volume\":\"54 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asian Journal of Pain\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.35353/ajp.2021.00017\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Pain","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35353/ajp.2021.00017","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的:腰骶脊柱手术后顽固性背痛和神经根痛是外科医生面临的挑战,因为背部手术失败综合征(FBSS)的病理生理机制尚不清楚。各种药物、运动、再手术、脊髓刺激和各种介入治疗,如硬膜外注射和射频治疗,已被建议作为治疗选择。然而,每种治疗方法的临床效果尚不清楚。方法:回顾性评估2014年至2017年连续接受翻修手术或射频治疗的FBSS患者的临床结果,这些患者先前对神经阻滞有反应。采用视觉模拟评分(VAS)对术前、术后1个月、6个月和12个月的疼痛进行分析。术前和术后12个月分别进行SF-36健康调查和Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)评分。结果:本研究共纳入70例患者,其中男性33例,女性37例。当比较术前和术后12个月的结果时,背部疼痛VAS评分从翻修手术的5.5降至4.2,射频治疗的5.1降至4.7。腿部疼痛VAS评分由6.5降至4.02,射频治疗由6.2降至4.3。翻修手术的ODI评分从70.9降至36.1,射频治疗的ODI评分从70.2降至36.1。翻修手术组SF-36评分由28.9提高到64.1,射频治疗组由29.6提高到59.6。治疗12个月后差异无统计学意义(p>0.05), 1个月时差异有统计学意义(p=0.01)。结论:与翻修手术相比,射频治疗在FBSS患者疼痛缓解、功能能力、患者满意度和生活质量方面的早期临床结果(治疗后长达1年)并不逊色。根据影像学结果或潜在疾病不适合手术治疗的患者,以及对诊断/治疗性神经阻滞有反应的患者,可以考虑射频治疗。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Early Clinical Outcome of Comparative Study between Revision Operation and Radiofrequency Treatment for Management of Failed Back Surgery Syndrome
Objective: Intractable back pain and radicular pain after lumbosacral spine surgery are challenges for surgeons because the pathophysiology of failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) remains unknown. Various medications, exercise, reoperation, spinal cord stimulation, and various interventional treatments, such as epidural injection, and radiofrequency treatment, have been suggested as treatment options. However, the clinical outcomes for each treatment are unclear. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated clinical outcomes of consecutive FBSS patients who underwent revision operation or radiofrequency treatment from 2014 to 2017, who previously showed response to nerve block. Pain was analyzed preoperatively and 1 month, 6 months, and 12 months postoperatively using a visual analogue scale (VAS). Short Form 36 (SF-36) health survey and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were assessed preoperatively and 12 months postoperatively. Results: A total of 70 patients was included in the present study (33 males, 37 females). When comparing preoperative and postoperative 12-month results, back pain VAS score decreased from 5.5 to 4.2 for revision operation and from 5.1 to 4.7 for radiofrequency treatment. Leg pain VAS score decreased from 6.5 to 4.02 for revision operation and 6.2 to 4.3 for radiofrequency treatment. ODI score decreased from 70.9 to 36.1 for revision operation and 70.2 to 36.1 for radiofrequency treatment. SF-36 score increased from 28.9 to 64.1 for revision operation and from 29.6 to 59.6 for radiofrequency treatment. Differences between treatments were not statistically significant after 12 months (p>0.05) but were at 1 month (p=0.01). Conclusion: Compared with revision operation, radiofrequency treatment is not inferior on early clinical outcome (up to 1 year following the treatment) in terms of pain relief, functional capacity, patient satisfaction, and quality of life in patients with FBSS. Radiofrequency treatment can be considered in patients who are not good candidates for surgical treatment based on imaging results or underlying diseases and who are responsive to diagnostic/therapeutic nerve blocks.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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