Lutze M, Stendel R, Vesper J, Brock M
Department of Neurosurgery, University Medical Center Benjamin Franklin, Free University of Berlin, Federal Republic of Germany.
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 1997;139(8):719-24. doi: 10.1007/BF01420044.
Periradicular therapy (PRT) has become popular in the treatment of lumbar radicular complaints, both primary, due to disc herniations (Group 1), and postoperative, following disc surgery (Group 2). However, hitherto reported data on 'periradicular injections' are more of a technical nature. The present study was designed to evaluate the therapeutic success of CT- versus fluoroscope-guided periradicular injections of local anaesthetics and corticoids, and to investigate the impact of imaging procedures on the results. We report on 80 patients who underwent CT-guided (n = 40) or fluoroscope-guided (n = 40) PRT for lumbar radicular irritation since April 1993. Forty patients had primary nerve root irritation due to disc protrusion, and 40 suffered from postoperative epidural fibrosis. Follow-up consisted in a clinical examination and an interview one day after each injection as well as 1 and 6 months later. Assessment was based on a score taking into account the clinical findings, the patient's complaints, and the patient's evaluation. Six months following treatment there was a significant reduction of ischialgia in both Groups 1 and 2 (p < 0.001). However, the results were significantly poorer in Group 2 (postoperative). Among the patients not operated on, those who underwent CT-guided injections had a significantly better outcome (p < 0.001). PRT had no significant influence on low back pain or pseudoradicular syndromes. The improvement of sensory disturbances achieved by both CT- and fluoroscope-guided injections in patients not previously submitted to surgery is statistically significant (p < 0.05). As compared to Group 1 (no surgery), the positive effects in patients of Group 2 were of significantly shorter duration (p < 0.05). Motor deficits were not influenced by the treatment. Long-term follow-up shows that there is no positive effect in those patients in whom the first two PRT attempts had failed. Thus, PRT represents a useful long-term therapeutic alternative for lumbar radicular syndromes, particularly when due to primary discogenic compression. CT-guided injection is superior to fluoroscope-assisted treatment for both its visualization and its longer-lasting effect.
神经根周围治疗(PRT)在治疗腰椎神经根症状方面已变得流行,这些症状包括因椎间盘突出引起的原发性症状(第1组)以及椎间盘手术后的术后症状(第2组)。然而,迄今报道的关于“神经根周围注射”的数据更多是技术性质的。本研究旨在评估CT引导与荧光镜引导下局部麻醉剂和皮质类固醇神经根周围注射的治疗成功率,并研究成像程序对结果的影响。我们报告了自1993年4月以来因腰椎神经根刺激接受CT引导(n = 40)或荧光镜引导(n = 40)PRT的80例患者。40例患者因椎间盘突出导致原发性神经根刺激,40例患有术后硬膜外纤维化。随访包括每次注射后1天以及1个月和6个月后的临床检查和访谈。评估基于一个综合临床发现、患者主诉和患者评价的评分。治疗6个月后,第1组和第2组的坐骨神经痛均显著减轻(p < 0.001)。然而,第2组(术后)的结果明显较差。在未接受手术的患者中,接受CT引导注射的患者结局明显更好(p < 0.001)。PRT对腰痛或假性神经根综合征没有显著影响。在未接受过手术的患者中,CT引导和荧光镜引导注射所实现的感觉障碍改善在统计学上具有显著意义(p < 0.05)。与第1组(未手术)相比,第2组患者的积极效果持续时间明显更短(p < 0.05)。运动功能障碍不受治疗影响。长期随访表明,前两次PRT尝试失败的患者没有积极效果。因此,PRT是腰椎神经根综合征的一种有用的长期治疗选择,特别是当病因是原发性椎间盘源性压迫时。CT引导注射在可视化和效果持久性方面均优于荧光镜辅助治疗。