Vatansever Dilek, Tekin Idil, Tuglu Ibrahim, Erbuyun Koray, Ok Gulay
Department of Anesthesiology, Medical Faculty of Celal Bayar University, Manisa, Turkey.
Clin J Pain. 2008 Oct;24(8):717-24. doi: 10.1097/AJP.0b013e318173c27a.
To compare the neuroablative effects of pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) and conventional radiofrequency (CRF) techniques on the sciatic nerve, a peripheral nerve that includes motor, sensory, and autonomous fibers.
The study consisted of 5 groups of 6 adult male Wistar rats. In the control group, no procedure was performed. In the sham group, electrode placement was the same as the other groups, but radiofrequency energy was not given to the rats. In the CRF40 group, 40 degrees C CRF was applied to the rats for 90 seconds. In the CRF80 group, 80 degrees C CRF was applied for 90 seconds. In the PRF group, the rats received 45 V PRF, which did not exceed 42 degrees C for 240 seconds. Two days later, sciatic nerve samples were taken. All specimens were evaluated both with light and electron microscopy. Sciatic nerve morphology was analyzed to compare the effects of CRF and PRF. Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests were used for comparing the means.
Minimal damage was observed in the control group, but damage increased in the sham group and became increasingly more distinct in the PRF, CRF40, and CRF80 groups.
Nerve tissues can be affected during any type of procedure, even during surgical applications. Our results suggest that PRF is less destructive than CRF for the peripheral nerves. However, this idea should also be investigated at the molecular level, and safety analysis should be performed for routine clinical practice.
比较脉冲射频（PRF）和传统射频（CRF）技术对坐骨神经（一种包含运动、感觉和自主神经纤维的周围神经）的神经毁损效果。
该研究由5组，每组6只成年雄性Wistar大鼠组成。对照组不进行任何操作。假手术组电极放置与其他组相同，但不给大鼠施加射频能量。CRF40组对大鼠施加40摄氏度的CRF，持续90秒。CRF80组施加80摄氏度的CRF，持续90秒。PRF组大鼠接受45伏的PRF，持续240秒，温度不超过42摄氏度。两天后，采集坐骨神经样本。所有标本均通过光学显微镜和电子显微镜进行评估。分析坐骨神经形态以比较CRF和PRF的效果。使用Kruskal-Wallis和Mann-Whitney U检验比较均值。
对照组观察到最小程度的损伤，但假手术组损伤增加，在PRF、CRF40和CRF80组中损伤变得越来越明显。
在任何类型的手术过程中，甚至在外科手术应用中，神经组织都可能受到影响。我们的结果表明，对于周围神经，PRF的破坏性小于CRF。然而，这一观点也应在分子水平上进行研究，并且应为常规临床实践进行安全性分析。
