Suppr超能文献

镇痛性消融与刺激技术的比较。

A comparison of analgesic ablative and stimulation techniques.

作者信息

Hitchcock E

出版信息

Zentralbl Neurochir. 1981;42(4):189-202.

PMID:7340308
Abstract

In a comprehensive evaluation of the literature one finds that some of the older surgical pain operations show good results when applied critically. In case of malignant basic diseases, the destructive methods should be used. Central pain conditions are better influenced by the stimulation methods. For trigeminal neuralgia and radicular pain, peripheral procedures are advisable; only when these fail to show the desired results, central methods should be employed. Although the destructive methods show a higher rate of complications, the number of complications occurring in the stimulation methods should not be underestimated. Finally the costs of the stimulation units for suppression of pain which is required for only a few weeks or months appear to be very high, so that a decision is necessary in each individual case.

摘要

在对文献的全面评估中发现,一些较早的外科疼痛手术在审慎应用时显示出良好的效果。对于恶性基础疾病的情况,应采用破坏性方法。中枢性疼痛状况受刺激方法的影响更好。对于三叉神经痛和神经根性疼痛,外周手术是可取的;只有当这些方法未能显示出预期效果时,才应采用中枢性方法。尽管破坏性方法的并发症发生率较高,但刺激方法中出现的并发症数量也不应被低估。最后,仅需几周或几个月来抑制疼痛的刺激装置成本似乎非常高,因此在每个具体病例中都有必要做出决策。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验