Department of Anesthesia, Assiut University, Assiut, Egypt.
Department of Anesthesia, Intensive Care, and Pain Management, South Egypt Cancer Institute, Assiut University, Assiut, Egyp.
Pain Physician. 2017 Sep;20(6):E873-E881.
During radiofrequency bursts of energy are applied to nervous tissue. The clinical advantages of this treatment remain unclear.
We compared the effectiveness and pain relief for idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia (TN) after continuous radiofrequency (CRF), pulsed radiofrequency (PRF), and combined continuous and pulsed radiofrequency (CCPRF) treatment of the Gasserian ganglion (GG).
We conducted a randomized prospective study. Forty-three patients were included. Eleven patients were treated with PRF at 42°C for 10 minutes (PRF group), 12 patients received CRF for 270 seconds at 75 °C (CRF group), and 20 patients received PRF for 10 minutes at 42°C followed by CRF for at 60°C for 270 seconds (CCPRF group).
Assuit University Hospital, Pain and Neurology outpatient clinics.
Patients were assessed for pain, satisfaction, and consumption of analgesics at baseline and 7 days, one month, 6 months, 12 months, and 24 months after the procedure. The incidence of complications, anesthesia dolorosa, weakness of muscles of mastication, numbness, and technical complications, was evaluated after the procedure.
Excellent pain relief was achieved after 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively in 95%, 85%, and 70% of patients with CCPRF; 75%, 75%, and reduced to 50% among patients with CRF; and 82%, reduced to 9.1%, and 0% of patients with PRF. No complications were recorded in 75% of patients in the CCPRF and PRF groups. There was one case of anesthesia dolorosa, 4 cases of masseter muscle weakness, and 5 cases of severe numbness recorded in the CRF group.
There was a small number of patients in each group.
The best results were observed in the CCPRF group, followed by the CRF group, and then the PRF group.Key words: Pulsed, continuous, radiofrequency, trigeminal neuralgia, Gasserian ganglion.
在射频能量脉冲期间施加于神经组织。这种治疗的临床优势尚不清楚。
我们比较了连续射频（CRF）、脉冲射频（PRF）和连续与脉冲射频联合（CCPRF）治疗三叉神经节（GG）后特发性三叉神经痛（TN）的疗效和止痛效果。
我们进行了一项随机前瞻性研究。纳入 43 例患者。11 例患者接受 42°C 持续 10 分钟的 PRF 治疗（PRF 组），12 例患者接受 75°C 持续 270 秒的 CRF 治疗（CRF 组），20 例患者接受 42°C 持续 10 分钟的 PRF 治疗，随后进行 60°C 持续 270 秒的 CRF 治疗（CCPRF 组）。
艾斯尤特大学医院，疼痛和神经病学门诊。
患者在基线时和术后 7 天、1 个月、6 个月、12 个月和 24 个月时评估疼痛、满意度和镇痛药的使用情况。术后评估并发症、感觉异常性疼痛、咀嚼肌无力、麻木和技术并发症的发生率。
CCPRF 组患者分别在术后 6、12 和 24 个月时获得了极好的止痛效果，分别为 95%、85%和 70%；CRF 组患者分别为 75%、75%和降低至 50%；PRF 组患者分别为 82%、降低至 9.1%和 0%。CCPRF 组和 PRF 组各有 75%的患者未发生并发症。CRF 组有 1 例感觉异常性疼痛，4 例咀嚼肌无力，5 例严重麻木。
每组患者数量较少。
CCPRF 组效果最好，其次是 CRF 组，然后是 PRF 组。关键词：脉冲、连续、射频、三叉神经痛、三叉神经节。
