镇静对诊断性腰椎内侧支阻滞治疗小关节源性腰痛的影响:一项观察性研究。
The Effect of Sedation on Diagnostic Lumbar Medial Branch Blocks for Facetogenic Low Back Pain: An Observational Study.
机构信息
Department of Anesthesiology, Pain Management and Perioperative Medicine- Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, MI.
Department of Anesthesiology, Pain Management and Perioperative Medicine- Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, MI; Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI.
出版信息
Pain Physician. 2024 May;27(4):E407-E418.
BACKGROUND
Lumbar medial branch blocks (MBB) are some of the most commonly performed pain procedures in the United States. Diagnostic MBBs are performed to confirm if the generator of low back pain is the facet joint. However, with diagnostic injections, false positive blocks may occur.
OBJECTIVES
Our prospective observational study aims to investigate the effects of midazolam sedation on patients' perceived intensity of pain relief following lumbar MBB.
STUDY DESIGN
This is a single-center multi-site prospective observational study registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04453449).
SETTING
The study was approved by the Henry Ford Health System Institutional Review Board (IRB) in June 2020 (IRB# 14010) and registered on clinicaltrials.gov in July 2020 (NCT04453449). This manuscript adheres to the applicable EQUATOR STROBE guidelines for an observational cohort study.
METHODS
Patients that underwent MBB without sedation were compared to sedated patients. Patients were asked to complete the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at baseline, one day after their diagnostic blocks, as well as 4 weeks and 8 weeks after their lumbar radiofrequency ablation (RFA). The primary outcome is the difference between baseline NRS pain scores and the lowest reported score in the 8 hours following MBB. For patients who proceed to RFA, the frequency of false positive blocks was evaluated. A patient was considered to have a false positive block when they failed to achieve 50% pain relief from RFA after 2 successful sequential MBBs.
RESULTS
There was no significant difference in the NRS pain score change between the sedated and non-sedated groups for diagnostic block one (P = 0.167) and diagnostic block 2 (P = 0.6145). There was no significant difference of false positive rates between non-sedation and sedation patients at 4-weeks post-RFA (P = 0.7178) and at 8-weeks post-RFA (P = 1.000).
LIMITATIONS
Some of the limitations of this study include its nonrandomized design, patient self-reported pain scores, as well as the small variability in the injection technique of proceduralists and in the anatomical location of the injection site.
CONCLUSIONS
This study showed that midazolam did not change patients' perceived intensity of pain following MBB, as well as false positive rates after RFA. Larger studies are required to draw definitive conclusions.
背景
腰椎内侧支阻滞(MBB)是美国最常进行的疼痛治疗程序之一。诊断性 MBB 用于确认腰椎疼痛的根源是否为关节突关节。然而,在进行诊断性注射时,可能会出现假阳性阻滞。
目的
我们的前瞻性观察性研究旨在探讨咪达唑仑镇静对腰椎 MBB 后患者疼痛缓解程度的影响。
研究设计
这是一项在亨利福特健康系统机构审查委员会(IRB)于 2020 年 6 月批准(IRB#14010)并于 2020 年 7 月在 clinicaltrials.gov 注册的单中心多站点前瞻性观察性研究(NCT04453449)。本手稿符合观察性队列研究的适用 EQUATOR STROBE 指南。
方法
将未接受镇静的 MBB 患者与接受镇静的患者进行比较。患者在基线时、诊断性阻滞后一天、4 周和 8 周时均需完成数字评分量表(NRS)。主要结局是 MBB 后 8 小时内基线 NRS 疼痛评分与最低报告评分之间的差异。对于接受腰椎射频消融术(RFA)的患者,评估假阳性阻滞的频率。当 2 次成功的 MBB 后,RFA 未能实现 50%的疼痛缓解时,患者被认为存在假阳性阻滞。
结果
在诊断性阻滞 1 时(P=0.167)和诊断性阻滞 2 时(P=0.6145),镇静组和非镇静组的 NRS 疼痛评分变化无显著差异。在 RFA 后 4 周(P=0.7178)和 8 周(P=1.000)时,非镇静组和镇静组的假阳性率无显著差异。
局限性
本研究的局限性包括非随机设计、患者自我报告的疼痛评分以及术者注射技术和注射部位解剖位置的较小变异性。
结论
本研究表明,咪达唑仑不会改变 MBB 后患者的疼痛感知强度,也不会改变 RFA 后的假阳性率。需要更大规模的研究来得出明确的结论。