腰椎关节突关节内注射富血小板血浆和类固醇治疗慢性腰痛的比较:一项前瞻性研究

IF 0.4 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS
Chandan Singh, S. Yadav, S. Loha, S. Prakash, A. Paswan
{"title":"腰椎关节突关节内注射富血小板血浆和类固醇治疗慢性腰痛的比较:一项前瞻性研究","authors":"Chandan Singh, S. Yadav, S. Loha, S. Prakash, A. Paswan","doi":"10.1177/22104917231161836","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Study design: Prospective randomized clinical study. Purpose: To compare the effectiveness and safety of intra-articular platelet-rich plasma (PCP) and steroid along with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in the treatment of chronic low back pain (LBP) due to facet joint arthropathy. Overview of literature: Facet joint pathology is an important cause of LBP—15–30% of all LBP cases. Lumbar intra-articular PRP is a relatively new method in the treatment of LBP. PRP stimulates the cells involved in regeneration. Hence, it seems a suitable option for the treatment of lumbar facet joint syndrome. Methods: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of facet joint injections in LBP secondary to facet joint arthropathy. Chronic LBP for ≥3 months (visual analogue scale (VAS) > 4), failed conservative treatment, no neurological deficit, unilateral facet joint pain, focal tenderness with hyperextension pain, and relief by diagnostic medial branch block were included. Patients were randomly allocated to Group S: Steroid (Triamcinolone) + RFA or Group P: PRP + RFA or Group R: 0.9% saline + RFA as control. Demographic, clinico-radiological, and outcome parameters were recorded till 6 months. Data were analyzed using SPSS and p < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: We studied 45 patients (n = 15 in each group) in the final analysis. Mean age was 45.7 ± 13.6 years and 60% were females in all groups. VAS decreased to 1.6 ± 0.8 (Group S) and 3.2 ± 0.8 (Group P) on day 1 ( p < 0.05). At 3 and 6 months, VAS reduced more in Group P (0.47 ± 0.5; 0.07 ± 0.2) versus Group S (2.53 ± 0.5; 3.07 ± 0.2) ( p < 0.001). Mean Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score at baseline was 72.8 ± 7.6 (all groups). At 1 month, Group S (17.2 ± 3.2) showed better improvement than Group P (23.2 ± 3.1) ( p < 0.05). At 6 months, Group P (8.9 ± 1.2) had more decrease in ODI than Group S (29.0 ± 2.1) ( p < 0.001). NSAIDs usage and Patient Satisfaction Score (PSS) were significantly better at 6 months in Group P than Group S ( p < 0.01; p < 0.05, respectively). Conclusion: Both PRP and corticosteroid injections were determined to be effective and safe for the treatment of lumbar facet joint syndrome after 6 months of follow-up. However, autologous PRP may be a superior treatment option for longer efficacy.","PeriodicalId":42408,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedics Trauma and Rehabilitation","volume":"81 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of intra-articular lumbar facet joint injection of platelet-rich plasma and steroid in the treatment of chronic low back pain: A prospective study\",\"authors\":\"Chandan Singh, S. Yadav, S. Loha, S. Prakash, A. Paswan\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/22104917231161836\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Study design: Prospective randomized clinical study. Purpose: To compare the effectiveness and safety of intra-articular platelet-rich plasma (PCP) and steroid along with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in the treatment of chronic low back pain (LBP) due to facet joint arthropathy. Overview of literature: Facet joint pathology is an important cause of LBP—15–30% of all LBP cases. Lumbar intra-articular PRP is a relatively new method in the treatment of LBP. PRP stimulates the cells involved in regeneration. Hence, it seems a suitable option for the treatment of lumbar facet joint syndrome. Methods: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of facet joint injections in LBP secondary to facet joint arthropathy. Chronic LBP for ≥3 months (visual analogue scale (VAS) > 4), failed conservative treatment, no neurological deficit, unilateral facet joint pain, focal tenderness with hyperextension pain, and relief by diagnostic medial branch block were included. Patients were randomly allocated to Group S: Steroid (Triamcinolone) + RFA or Group P: PRP + RFA or Group R: 0.9% saline + RFA as control. Demographic, clinico-radiological, and outcome parameters were recorded till 6 months. Data were analyzed using SPSS and p < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: We studied 45 patients (n = 15 in each group) in the final analysis. Mean age was 45.7 ± 13.6 years and 60% were females in all groups. VAS decreased to 1.6 ± 0.8 (Group S) and 3.2 ± 0.8 (Group P) on day 1 ( p < 0.05). At 3 and 6 months, VAS reduced more in Group P (0.47 ± 0.5; 0.07 ± 0.2) versus Group S (2.53 ± 0.5; 3.07 ± 0.2) ( p < 0.001). Mean Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score at baseline was 72.8 ± 7.6 (all groups). At 1 month, Group S (17.2 ± 3.2) showed better improvement than Group P (23.2 ± 3.1) ( p < 0.05). At 6 months, Group P (8.9 ± 1.2) had more decrease in ODI than Group S (29.0 ± 2.1) ( p < 0.001). NSAIDs usage and Patient Satisfaction Score (PSS) were significantly better at 6 months in Group P than Group S ( p < 0.01; p < 0.05, respectively). Conclusion: Both PRP and corticosteroid injections were determined to be effective and safe for the treatment of lumbar facet joint syndrome after 6 months of follow-up. However, autologous PRP may be a superior treatment option for longer efficacy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42408,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Orthopaedics Trauma and Rehabilitation\",\"volume\":\"81 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Orthopaedics Trauma and Rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/22104917231161836\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopaedics Trauma and Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/22104917231161836","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

研究设计:前瞻性随机临床研究。目的:比较关节内富血小板血浆(PCP)和类固醇联合射频消融术(RFA)治疗小关节病变所致慢性腰痛(LBP)的有效性和安全性。文献综述:小关节病理是LBP的重要原因,占所有LBP病例的15 - 30%。腰椎关节内PRP是治疗腰痛的一种较新的方法。PRP刺激参与再生的细胞。因此,它似乎是治疗腰椎小关节综合征的合适选择。方法:评价小关节关节注射治疗继发性腰痛的疗效和安全性。慢性LBP≥3个月(视觉模拟评分(VAS) > 4),保守治疗失败,无神经功能缺损,单侧小关节疼痛,局灶性压痛伴过伸性疼痛,诊断性内侧分支阻滞缓解。患者随机分为S组:类固醇(曲安奈德)+ RFA组或P组:PRP + RFA组或R组:0.9%生理盐水+ RFA组作为对照。6个月前记录人口学、临床放射学和结局参数。数据采用SPSS分析,p < 0.05为差异有统计学意义。结果:我们最终分析了45例患者(每组15例)。平均年龄45.7±13.6岁,女性占60%。第1天VAS分别降至1.6±0.8 (S组)和3.2±0.8 (P组)(P < 0.05)。第3、6个月时,P组VAS下降幅度更大(0.47±0.5;0.07±0.2)vs S组(2.53±0.5;3.07±0.2)(p < 0.001)。各组基线Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)平均评分为72.8±7.6。1个月时,S组(17.2±3.2)优于P组(23.2±3.1)(P < 0.05)。6个月时,P组ODI下降(8.9±1.2)高于S组(29.0±2.1)(P < 0.001)。6个月时,P组患者非甾体抗炎药使用情况及患者满意度评分(PSS)均显著优于S组(P < 0.01;P < 0.05)。结论:经过6个月的随访,PRP和皮质类固醇注射治疗腰椎小关节综合征是有效和安全的。然而,自体PRP可能是一种更好的治疗选择,疗效更长。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of intra-articular lumbar facet joint injection of platelet-rich plasma and steroid in the treatment of chronic low back pain: A prospective study
Study design: Prospective randomized clinical study. Purpose: To compare the effectiveness and safety of intra-articular platelet-rich plasma (PCP) and steroid along with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in the treatment of chronic low back pain (LBP) due to facet joint arthropathy. Overview of literature: Facet joint pathology is an important cause of LBP—15–30% of all LBP cases. Lumbar intra-articular PRP is a relatively new method in the treatment of LBP. PRP stimulates the cells involved in regeneration. Hence, it seems a suitable option for the treatment of lumbar facet joint syndrome. Methods: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of facet joint injections in LBP secondary to facet joint arthropathy. Chronic LBP for ≥3 months (visual analogue scale (VAS) > 4), failed conservative treatment, no neurological deficit, unilateral facet joint pain, focal tenderness with hyperextension pain, and relief by diagnostic medial branch block were included. Patients were randomly allocated to Group S: Steroid (Triamcinolone) + RFA or Group P: PRP + RFA or Group R: 0.9% saline + RFA as control. Demographic, clinico-radiological, and outcome parameters were recorded till 6 months. Data were analyzed using SPSS and p < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: We studied 45 patients (n = 15 in each group) in the final analysis. Mean age was 45.7 ± 13.6 years and 60% were females in all groups. VAS decreased to 1.6 ± 0.8 (Group S) and 3.2 ± 0.8 (Group P) on day 1 ( p < 0.05). At 3 and 6 months, VAS reduced more in Group P (0.47 ± 0.5; 0.07 ± 0.2) versus Group S (2.53 ± 0.5; 3.07 ± 0.2) ( p < 0.001). Mean Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score at baseline was 72.8 ± 7.6 (all groups). At 1 month, Group S (17.2 ± 3.2) showed better improvement than Group P (23.2 ± 3.1) ( p < 0.05). At 6 months, Group P (8.9 ± 1.2) had more decrease in ODI than Group S (29.0 ± 2.1) ( p < 0.001). NSAIDs usage and Patient Satisfaction Score (PSS) were significantly better at 6 months in Group P than Group S ( p < 0.01; p < 0.05, respectively). Conclusion: Both PRP and corticosteroid injections were determined to be effective and safe for the treatment of lumbar facet joint syndrome after 6 months of follow-up. However, autologous PRP may be a superior treatment option for longer efficacy.
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
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
36
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
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