Malaithong Wanwipha, Munjupong Sithapan
Department of Anesthesiology, Phramongkutklao Hospital and Phramongkutklao Collage of Medicine, Bangkok, Thailand.
Anesth Pain Med. 2022 Dec 14;12(6):e129747. doi: 10.5812/aapm-129747. eCollection 2022 Dec.
Continuous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) can effectively manage cervical facet joint pain related to neuropathic symptoms in the post-radiofrequency period. Additionally, pulse radiofrequency (PRF) provides relief of neuropathic symptoms. However, the effect of combined RFA and PRF has yet to be determined.
The study aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of RFA (CRF group) and combined RFA and PRF (CPRF group).
The study retrospectively reviewed the charts of patients with cervical facet joint pain undergoing RFA between June 1, 2014, and June 1, 2017, or combined RFA and PRF between June 1, 2017, and June 1, 2020, at a pain research center. Thirty-nine consecutive patients identified from charts meeting the inclusion criteria were included and classified in CRF (n = 22) and CPRF groups (n = 17). The results were evaluated using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and neck pain disability index (NDI) before procedures and 1, 3, and 6 months after the injections. Successful treatment was expressed as at least 80% pain relief from baseline and NDI score <15 points. The duration of pain relief was expressed as the period between pain relief and pain reoccurrence to 50% of the preprocedural pain level. The primary outcome was successful treatment in the groups, and the secondary outcome was the duration of pain relief and post-cervical radiofrequency side effects in the groups.
Fourteen (66.7%) patients in the CRF group and 12 (66.7%) in the CPRF group experienced successful treatment at three and six-month follow-ups (P > 0.05). The median time to the reoccurrence of at least 50% of preprocedural pain level was 303.8 days in the CRF group and 270 days in the CPRF group (P = 0.395). However, the CPRF group showed significantly less postoperative numbness, dysesthesia, and hypersensitivity syndrome than the CRF group (P < 0.05).
Combined RFA and PRF can be complementary treatment for cervical facet joint pain, providing an adequate success rate and duration of pain relief as RFA alone but with significantly fewer post-radiofrequency side effects.
连续射频消融术(RFA)可有效治疗射频术后与神经病理性症状相关的颈椎小关节疼痛。此外,脉冲射频(PRF)可缓解神经病理性症状。然而,RFA与PRF联合应用的效果尚未确定。
本研究旨在比较RFA(CRF组)与RFA联合PRF(CPRF组)的有效性和安全性。
本研究回顾性分析了2014年6月1日至2017年6月1日在疼痛研究中心接受RFA治疗,或2017年6月1日至2020年6月1日接受RFA联合PRF治疗的颈椎小关节疼痛患者的病历。从符合纳入标准的病历中连续选取39例患者,分为CRF组(n = 22)和CPRF组(n = 17)。在治疗前以及注射后1、3和6个月,使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)和颈部疼痛残疾指数(NDI)对结果进行评估。成功治疗定义为疼痛较基线缓解至少80%且NDI评分<15分。疼痛缓解持续时间定义为从疼痛缓解到疼痛复发至术前疼痛水平50%的时间段。主要结局是两组的成功治疗情况,次要结局是两组的疼痛缓解持续时间和颈椎射频术后副作用。
CRF组14例(66.7%)患者和CPRF组12例(66.7%)患者在3个月和6个月随访时获得成功治疗(P > 0.05)。CRF组至少50%术前疼痛水平复发的中位时间为303.8天,CPRF组为270天(P = 0.395)。然而,CPRF组术后麻木、感觉异常和过敏综合征明显少于CRF组(P < 0.05)。
RFA与PRF联合应用可作为颈椎小关节疼痛的补充治疗方法,其成功率和疼痛缓解持续时间与单独使用RFA相当,但射频术后副作用明显减少。