治疗慢性腰椎面(颧骨)关节疼痛的传统方法与冷却射频神经切断术的比较。

IF 1.4 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Pain management Pub Date : 2024-06-02 Epub Date: 2024-07-30 DOI:10.1080/17581869.2024.2377061
Burcu Candan, Semih Gungor
{"title":"治疗慢性腰椎面(颧骨)关节疼痛的传统方法与冷却射频神经切断术的比较。","authors":"Burcu Candan, Semih Gungor","doi":"10.1080/17581869.2024.2377061","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Aim:</b> Traditional radiofrequency ablation (TRFA) effectively treats facet joint-related pain, while water-cooled radiofrequency ablation (CRFA) may offer benefits like larger lesions and easier nerve access. Our goal is to assess the effectiveness of TRFA and CRFA for facet joint-related pain.<b>Materials & methods:</b> This retrospective study included an evaluation of 346 RFA interventions performed on 190 patients suffering from long-term low-back pain. The primary outcome was defined as a decrease of ≥50% of the mean numeric rating scale.<b>Results:</b> The primary outcome was achieved at the first follow-up (FU) for both TRFA and CRFA, with pain relief of 55.2 and 60.5%, respectively. At the second FU, the primary outcome was achieved only in the CRFA group (54.1%), although the TRFA group also showed a good improvement (48.6%). In both groups, pain relief was under 50% during the third FU.<b>Conclusion:</b> Our study indicates that both CRFA and TRFA modalities are effective and safe treatments.</p>","PeriodicalId":20000,"journal":{"name":"Pain management","volume":" ","pages":"305-314"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11340768/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Traditional versus cooled-radiofrequency neurotomy for the treatment of chronic lumbar facet (zygapophyseal) joint pain.\",\"authors\":\"Burcu Candan, Semih Gungor\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17581869.2024.2377061\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Aim:</b> Traditional radiofrequency ablation (TRFA) effectively treats facet joint-related pain, while water-cooled radiofrequency ablation (CRFA) may offer benefits like larger lesions and easier nerve access. Our goal is to assess the effectiveness of TRFA and CRFA for facet joint-related pain.<b>Materials & methods:</b> This retrospective study included an evaluation of 346 RFA interventions performed on 190 patients suffering from long-term low-back pain. The primary outcome was defined as a decrease of ≥50% of the mean numeric rating scale.<b>Results:</b> The primary outcome was achieved at the first follow-up (FU) for both TRFA and CRFA, with pain relief of 55.2 and 60.5%, respectively. At the second FU, the primary outcome was achieved only in the CRFA group (54.1%), although the TRFA group also showed a good improvement (48.6%). In both groups, pain relief was under 50% during the third FU.<b>Conclusion:</b> Our study indicates that both CRFA and TRFA modalities are effective and safe treatments.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20000,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pain management\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"305-314\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11340768/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pain management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17581869.2024.2377061\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/30 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17581869.2024.2377061","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:传统射频消融术(TRFA)可有效治疗面关节相关疼痛,而水冷射频消融术(CRFA)则可提供更大的病灶和更容易的神经通路等优势。我们的目标是评估 TRFA 和 CRFA 治疗面关节相关疼痛的效果。材料和方法:这项回顾性研究对 190 名长期腰背痛患者进行的 346 次 RFA 干预进行了评估。主要结果定义为平均数字评分表下降≥50%。研究结果TRFA和CRFA在首次随访(FU)时均达到了主要结果,疼痛缓解率分别为55.2%和60.5%。在第二次随访中,只有 CRFA 组(54.1%)达到了主要结果,尽管 TRFA 组也有很好的改善(48.6%)。在第三个疗程中,两组的疼痛缓解率均低于 50%。结论我们的研究表明,CRFA 和 TRFA 方法都是有效且安全的治疗方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Traditional versus cooled-radiofrequency neurotomy for the treatment of chronic lumbar facet (zygapophyseal) joint pain.

Aim: Traditional radiofrequency ablation (TRFA) effectively treats facet joint-related pain, while water-cooled radiofrequency ablation (CRFA) may offer benefits like larger lesions and easier nerve access. Our goal is to assess the effectiveness of TRFA and CRFA for facet joint-related pain.Materials & methods: This retrospective study included an evaluation of 346 RFA interventions performed on 190 patients suffering from long-term low-back pain. The primary outcome was defined as a decrease of ≥50% of the mean numeric rating scale.Results: The primary outcome was achieved at the first follow-up (FU) for both TRFA and CRFA, with pain relief of 55.2 and 60.5%, respectively. At the second FU, the primary outcome was achieved only in the CRFA group (54.1%), although the TRFA group also showed a good improvement (48.6%). In both groups, pain relief was under 50% during the third FU.Conclusion: Our study indicates that both CRFA and TRFA modalities are effective and safe treatments.

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
Pain management
Pain management CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
5.90%
发文量
62
×
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