Luo Fang, Wang Tao, Shen Ying, Meng Lan, Lu Jingjing, Ji Nan
Department of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University.
Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital, Shanghai, China.
Pain Physician. 2017 May;20(4):271-279.
A recent study showed that 50% of patients who suffered from refractory neuralgia of the infraorbital nerve obtained satisfactory efficacy after pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) treatment. A pilot study showed that increasing the output voltage of PRF significantly improved the efficacy for trigeminal neuralgia; however, whether increasing the output voltage of PRF can improve the treatment outcomes for neuralgia of the infraorbital nerve is unknown.
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of high voltage PRF treatment in comparison with standard voltage PRF for neuralgia of the infraorbital nerve.
Prospective, single-center, double-blinded, randomized, controlled trial.
Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University.
A total of 60 patients with refractory neuralgia of the infraorbital nerve were randomly divided into the high voltage PRF group and the standard voltage PRF group to treat their infraorbital nerves. Neither the patients, pain physicians, nor the follow-up evaluators knew the patient group assignments. The primary outcome measure was the one-year response rate. The secondary outcome measures included the time to take effect after PRF, the one-month, 3-month, and 6-month response rates, the relapse rate, and adverse reactions.
The intent-to-treat analysis showed that the one-month, 3-month, 6-month, and one-year response rates were all 90% in the high voltage group, which were significantly higher than the rates in the standard voltage group (67% [P < 0.05], 67% [P < 0.05], 63% [P < 0.05], and 60% [P <0.01], respectively). Furthermore, 27% of the patients in the high-voltage group and 13% of the patients in the standard voltage group experienced minor transient (10 - 30 days) numbness in the innervation area after PRF; no other serious adverse reactions were observed in the 2 groups (P > 0.05).
We did not investigate the dose-effect relationship between the output voltage and efficacy or the effect of a higher pulse dose on efficacy. This study was a single-center study, and multi-center, randomized, controlled studies are needed to obtain the highest level of empirical evidence. Additionally, the follow-up period lasted only one year in this study; thus, long-term efficacy needs to be further confirmed.
The results showed that high voltage PRF was effective and safe for patients with refractory neuralgia of the infraorbital nerve and could become a treatment option in patients who do not respond to conservative treatment.
最近一项研究表明,50%患有难治性眶下神经痛的患者在接受脉冲射频(PRF)治疗后获得了满意的疗效。一项初步研究表明,提高PRF的输出电压可显著提高三叉神经痛的疗效;然而,提高PRF的输出电压是否能改善眶下神经痛的治疗效果尚不清楚。
评估高压PRF治疗与标准电压PRF治疗眶下神经痛的疗效和安全性。
前瞻性、单中心、双盲、随机对照试验。
首都医科大学附属北京天坛医院。
将60例难治性眶下神经痛患者随机分为高压PRF组和标准电压PRF组,对其眶下神经进行治疗。患者、疼痛科医生和随访评估人员均不知道患者的分组情况。主要观察指标为一年缓解率。次要观察指标包括PRF治疗后的起效时间、1个月、3个月和6个月的缓解率、复发率及不良反应。
意向性分析显示,高压组1个月、3个月、6个月和1年的缓解率均为90%,显著高于标准电压组(分别为67%[P<0.05]、67%[P<0.05]、63%[P<0.05]和60%[P<0.01])。此外,高压组27%的患者和标准电压组13%的患者在PRF治疗后神经支配区域出现轻微短暂(10 - 30天)麻木;两组均未观察到其他严重不良反应(P>0.05)。
我们未研究输出电压与疗效之间的剂量效应关系,也未研究更高脉冲剂量对疗效的影响。本研究为单中心研究,需要多中心随机对照研究以获得最高水平的经验证据。此外,本研究的随访期仅为一年;因此,长期疗效需要进一步证实。
结果表明,高压PRF治疗难治性眶下神经痛患者有效且安全,可成为对保守治疗无反应患者的一种治疗选择。