臭氧联合颈椎旁神经阻滞治疗颈源性头痛的临床疗效观察

目的 评估臭氧联合颈椎旁神经阻滞治疗颈源性头痛的临床疗效.方法 对2009-09-2011-09我院疼痛门诊178例颈源性头痛患者进行了臭氧联合颈椎旁神经阻滞,将患者分为对照组(n=88)和治疗组(n=90),治疗组采用臭氧联合颈椎旁神经阻滞,对照组仅使用颈椎旁神经阻滞,通过对患者进行视觉疼痛评分比例尺(VAS)和临床表现进行临床疗效观察.结果 两组患者治疗后VAS评分均有明显的降低,治疗组评分的下降更为明显,两组之间差异具有显著性(P＜0.05);治疗组的痊愈率和好转率较高,两组之间差异具有显著性(P＜0.05).结论 臭氧联合颈椎旁神经阻滞是临床上比较确切的治疗方法,疗效优于单纯颈椎旁神经阻滞治疗颈源性头痛.     

臭氧联合神经阻滞治疗颅脑外伤后颈源性头痛58例

目的：观察臭氧联合神经阻滞治疗颅脑外伤后颈源性头痛的疗效。方法：120例颅脑外伤后颈源性头痛患者,采用随机数字表法分为两组。对照组给予颈椎旁神经阻滞疗法治疗（n=62）,观察组采用臭氧联合颈椎旁神经阻滞治疗（n=58）。结果：治疗7d后,观察组疼痛评分、头痛发作次数比对照组均有明显的降低（P〈0．05）,1个月后生活质量优于对照组（P〈0．05）。结论：臭氧联合颈椎旁神经阻滞治疗颅脑损伤后的颈源性头痛,近期疗效优于单一的神经阻滞疗法。     

椎旁神经阻滞复合臭氧治疗腰椎间盘突出效果观察

目的观察椎旁神经阻滞复合臭氧注入治疗腰椎间盘突出的效果。方法随机将60例腰间盘突出患者分为2组,各30例。对照组应用椎旁神经阻滞疗法治疗,观察组在对照组基础上联合注射臭氧治疗。比较治疗前、治疗后1个月、3个月疼痛评分及疗效。结果治疗前,2组患者的疼痛评分差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。治疗后,2组患者疼痛程度均缓解,但观察组患者的疼痛评分低于对照组,疗效优于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论椎旁神经阻滞联合臭氧注入能够明显缓解疼痛程度,疗效显著。     

星状神经节阻滞治疗颈源性眩晕的疗效观察与护理

目的:探讨星状神经节阻滞(SGB)治疗颈源性眩晕的临床效果.方法:将68例颈源性眩晕的患者随机分成观察组与对照组各34例,分别使用星状神经节阻滞治疗与传统基础疗法并进行疗效比较.结果:观察组疗效及显效、痊愈时间显著优于对照组(P<0.05,P<0.01).结论:星状神经节阻滞治疗颈源性眩晕具有疗效好,安全性高,元明显副作用等优点,值得推广.     

连续硬膜外阻滞联合臭氧治疗颈源性头痛的疗效分析

目的探讨连续硬膜外腔阻滞联合臭氧硬膜外腔注射治疗颈源性头痛的临床疗效。方法诊断为颈源性头痛的患者40例,随机分为连续硬膜外腔阻滞组(E组)和连续硬膜外腔阻滞联合臭氧注射组(EO组)。两组患者接受持续硬膜外注射治疗3周,EO组每48小时给予硬膜外腔臭氧注射,每次10ml(30μg/ml),记录两组治疗前及治疗后1和2周及1、3、6个月的治疗效果,采用VAS评分及其改良Macnab疗效评定标准评价各时点的治疗优良率。结果与治疗前比较,治疗后两组VAS评分明显降低(P0.05);EO组在治疗后1、3和6个月时VAS评分均明显低于E组(P0.05)。治疗后1、3和6个月时EO组的治疗优良率明显高于E组(P0.05)。结论连续硬膜外腔阻滞联合臭氧治疗颈源性头痛,远期效果优于单纯连续硬膜外腔阻滞,值得临床选用。     

星状神经节阻滞并发颈部血肿1例报告

星状神经节的作用在医学基础研究和临床疼痛治疗中被得到重视 ,国内外文献有诸多的报道。星状神经节阻滞(SGB)确切的治疗效果 ,已在临床中广泛用于颈椎病、头痛、头晕、植物神经功能紊乱、雷诺氏病等的治疗 ,但颈部结构复杂 ,在操作中随时会出现各种并发症 ,现将星状神经节阻滞后并发颈部血肿 1例报告如下 :患者 ,女 ,5 2岁 ,颈源性头痛患者 ,第二次星状神经节阻滞治疗 ,取仰卧位 ,选胸锁关节上 2 cm、胸锁乳突肌内缘、平第一环状软骨为穿刺点 ,常规消毒 ,戴无菌手套 ,在穿刺点垂直进针抵达骨面 ,回抽无血液及脑脊液 ,注入 1% lidocain7m …     

神经阻滞联合药物治疗老年胸背部带状疱疹后神经痛的临床观察

目的观察椎旁神经阻滞及皮损区局部浸润联合药物和心理学综合疗法对老年胸背部带状疱疹后神经痛的疗效.方法选择老年胸背部带状疱疹后神经痛患者43例.皮损分布区T2～T9.采用椎旁神经阻滞、皮损区局部浸润联合全身应用复方甘草酸苷、消炎镇痛药及心理治疗.以视觉模拟评分(VAS)和睡眠质量评分(QS)综合评定治疗效果.结果治疗前VAS为(8.57±0.61)分,QS为(3.62±0.31)分;治疗后1～4周VAS评分和QS评分均明显降低,与治疗前比较有显著性差异(P＜0.01);显效率为88.3%,总有效率为100%.结论以椎旁神经阻滞和皮损区局部浸润为主,联合药物和心理学治疗对缓解带状疱疹后神经痛和改善睡眠质量,疗效显著而安全.     

星状神经节阻滞治疗女性颈源性头痛及椎动脉型颈椎病的疗效观察

目的:探讨星状神经节阻滞治疗女性颈源性头痛及椎动脉型颈椎病的临床治疗效果.方法:选择经我院门诊确诊的颈源性头痛及椎动脉型颈椎病其中主症状为发作性眩晕,并且其眩晕与体位有关.部分患者可伴有头痛,恶心,呕吐甚至摔例等症状的患者40例.均采用星状神经节阻滞(SGB)治疗,SGB法3次/周,左右交替进行,每10次为1疗程,休息5d,行第2疗程治疗,所有患者均治疗2个疗程.根据患者治疗前后发作性眩晕,头痛,恶心,呕吐甚至摔例等症状改善情况评价星状神经节阻滞治疗女性颈源性头痛及推动脉型颈椎病的临床效果.患者治疗前后发作性眩晕,头痛,恶心,呕吐甚至摔例等症状明显改善,其总有效率达90％以上.结论星状神经节阻滞疗法治疗女性颈源性头痛及椎动脉型颈椎病效果确切.     

胶原酶溶解术联合星状神经节阻滞治疗混合型颈椎病的临床观察

目的 分析研究胶原酶溶解术联合星状神经节阻滞(SGB)治疗混合型颈椎病的疗效.方法 将320例混合型颈椎病患者随机分为A、B两组,每组160例.A组采用胶原酶溶解术联合SGB治疗,B组采用胶原酶溶解术治疗,以视觉模拟评分(VAS)及颈椎病临床评价量表(CASCS)对治疗前、治疗后10 d、1个月、半年及1年进行疗效评价.结果 A、B组治疗后各时间点VAS及CASCS评分与治疗前比较均有明显改善(P＜0.05),A组术后10 d的CASCS评分较B组有统计学差异(P＜0.05).结论 胶原酶溶解术联合SGB治疗混合型颈椎病具有很好的综合疗效,不仅明显缓解患者疼痛,也改善了交感及椎动脉型颈椎病的临床症状.     

糖皮质激素对椎旁阻滞治疗带状疱疹后神经痛疗效的影响

目的 观察糖皮质激素对椎旁阻滞治疗胸背部带状疱疹后遗神经痛(post-herpetic neuralgia,PHN)疗效的影响.方法 选择病变累及范围在T1～T12的顽固性PHN(带状疱疹后疼痛持续大于3个月且VAS大于7分)患者80例,随机数字表法分为神经妥乐平+复方倍他米松注射液椎旁阻滞组(激素组)及神经妥乐平椎旁阻滞组(非激素组)(每组40例).分别每2周行1次椎旁阻滞治疗,每位患者连续治疗4次,观察患者每次治疗后疼痛改善情况、疗程结束时.发痛发作频率及副作用.结果 两组患者每次治疗后疼痛较前一次均有明显缓解(P＜0.05),疗程结束时两组患者疼痛症状较治疗前明显改善(P＜0.01),部分爆发痛缓解明显,均未出现明显副作用;两组间比较,无论是各时间节点疼痛缓解还是爆发痛发作频率,差异均无统计学意义(P＞0.05). 结论 椎旁阻滞时加入糖皮质激素治疗PHN疗效并不优于不加糖皮质激素阻滞.     

右美托咪啶辅助星状神经节阻滞治疗老年患者三叉神经疱疹后神经痛的可行性

目的 评价右美托咪啶辅助星状神经节阻滞治疗老年患者三叉神经疱疹后神经痛的可行性.方法 拟行星状神经节阻滞的三叉神经疱疹后神经痛的老年患者45例,性别不限,年龄65～85岁,体重45～85 kg,ASA分级Ⅱ级.采用随机数字表法,将患者随机分为3组(n=15):单纯星状神经节阻滞组(SGB组)、0.4μg/ml右美托咪啶辅助星状神经节阻滞组(DS1组)和0.6 μg/ml右美托咪啶辅助星状神经节阻滞组(DS2组).DS1组和DS2组于星状神经节阻滞前分别静脉输注浓度为0.4和0.6μg/ml的右美托咪啶0.1 ml/kg,SGB组输注等容量生理盐水,输注时间15 min.给予0.5％罗哌卡因8～10ml行星状神经节阻滞.记录阻滞起效时间和阻滞维持时间.记录术中心动过缓、低血压和呼吸抑制的发生情况.于治疗后1、2、4和8周时,行VAS评分,0～3分为镇痛满意,计算镇痛满意率.结果 三组心动过缓、低血压及呼吸抑制的发生率比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).与SGB组比较,DS1组和DS2组阻滞维持时间延长,治疗后2、4和8周时镇痛满意率升高(P＜0.05);DS1组和DS2组阻滞起效时间、阻滞维持时间和镇痛满意率比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 与单纯星状神经节阻滞相比,右美托咪啶辅助星状神经节阻滞治疗老年患者三叉神经疱疹后神经痛的效果更佳.     

Topical prilocaine-lidocaine cream combined with peripheral nerve block improves pain control in prostatic biopsy: results from a prospective randomized trial

OBJECTIVES: To compare pain control results between periprostatic nerve block alone and combined with topical prilocaine-lidocaine cream as local anesthesia of prostate biopsy. METHODS: Three hundred patients were randomized to receive PNB (group 1), topical anesthesia of the anal ring, anal canal, and anterior rectal wall combined with PNB (group 2) and placebo (group 3). Patients were asked to use scale of 0-10 to complete a visual analogue scale questionnaire about pain during probe insertion (VAS1), periprostatic infiltration (VAS2), and cores (VAS3). RESULTS: Pain during probe insertion in group 2 was significantly less than in groups 1 and 3 (VAS1, 0.29 vs. 1.46 and 1.48; p<0.0001). Pain during periprostatic infiltration was also reduced in group 2 compared with group 1 (VAS2, 1.06 vs. 2.39; p<0.0001). Pain control was similar during biopsy in the PNB and combined groups (VAS3, 0.43 vs. 0.37; p=0.77) and was superior to group 3 (VAS3, 3.02; p<0.0001). In younger patients (cut off, median age 67 yr) these differences were still significant between groups 1 and 2 (VAS1, 1.95 vs.0.31; p<0.0001 and VAS2, 2.97 vs. 1,15; p<0.0001), but not in older patients (VAS1, 0.91 vs. 0.28; p=0.06; VAS2, 1.52 vs. 0,92; p=0.06). Vagal symptoms were registered in 36 (12%) patients in all groups. Sepsis occurred in one group 1 patient and in one group 2 patient. Rectal bleeding was observed in one group 2 patient. CONCLUSION: Combined prilocaine-lidocaine cream topically placed with PNB is superior to PNB alone and may be of maximum benefit for younger patients.     

Periprostatic nerve block (PNB) alone vs PNB combined with an anaesthetic‐myorelaxant agent cream for prostate biopsy: a prospective,randomized double‐arm study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of periprostatic nerve block (PNB) alone vs PNB combined with the local administration of a 1.5% lidocaine/0.3% nifedipine cream (Antrolin®, Bracco, Milan, Italy).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In a prospective, randomized, double‐arm study, 200 patients were randomized to receive PNB alone (group A, 100) or PNB combined with a previous administration of the topical anaesthetic Antrolin (group B, 100). The PNB was applied by infiltrating bilaterally a solution of 5 mL lidocaine 1% and naropine 0.75%. Patients were asked to complete visual analogue scale (VAS) questionnaire (0–10) to score pain and discomfort during probe insertion (VAS1), PNB (VAS2), cores (VAS3), 30 min after biopsy (VAS4), the evening of the procedure (VAS5), and the day after biopsy (VAS6).

RESULTS

Pain during probe insertion in group B was significantly less than in group A (VAS1 0.82 vs 2.9; P < 0.001). Pain during periprostatic infiltration was also lower in group B than group A (VAS2 1.4 vs 3.48; P < 0.001). Pain control was similar during biopsy in the two groups (VAS3 1.28 vs 1.2; P = 0.69). The pain scored at VAS4 was significantly less in group B (0.7 vs 1.86, P < 0.001), as was VAS5 (0.68 vs 1.3, P < 0.001). There was no difference in pain perception the day after biopsy (VAS6, 0.32 vs 0.22, P = 0.14).

CONCLUSIONS

Antrolin placed with PNB is better than PNB alone in reducing pain and discomfort during transrectal‐ultrasonography guided prostate biopsy.     

Relationship between MPQ and VAS in 962 patients. A rationale for their use

BACKGROUND: 1) To analyse the information provided both by the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and by the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ) in a cross-sectional study with patients affected by different kinds of pain and to study the relationship between VAS and MPQ scores in the same patient sample. METHODS: 962 patients affected by different kinds of pain (i.e. neuropathic pain, acute post-traumatic pain, chronic musculo-skeletal pain, headache, and cancer pain) were enrolled into the study during the first visit for pain management. The horizontal 10cm VAS and the Italian version of the MPQ were administered. RESULTS: VAS scores proved to be significantly lower in acute post traumatic and in chronic musculo- skeletal pain compared to headache and neuropathic pain. VAS scores were signi- ficantly higher in neuropathic pain compared to cancer pain. MPQ total score (Pain Rating Index, PRI) related to neuropathic pain was significantly higher than scores reported in the other pain groups, with the exception of cancer pain. Cancer pain MPQ total score was higher than acute post-traumatic and chronic musculo-skeletal PRI pain scores. Different patterns of MPQ dimensions emerged within each pain group. The association between VAS and PRI, analysed by means of stepwise multiple regression analyses was significantly different among the groups (p<0.0001). The percentage of VAS variance explained by MPQ PRI score ranged from 6% (headache) to 32% (neuro-pathic pain). CONCLUSIONS: Several differences emerged among the pain groups. VAS and MPQ resulted to address pain aspects only partially overlapping. In some clinical conditions (headache and cancer) the MPQ can provide more detailed and clinically useful information about patients' pain experience.     

膝关节置换术后连续股神经阻滞镇痛的短期临床效果

目的：通过术后不同镇痛方式的对比研究,探讨简单、规范、有效的围手术期镇痛方案。方法选择2011年6月至2013年12月行初次单侧全膝关节置换患者共248人,随机分为阻滞组（124人）及静脉组（124人）。阻滞组在术前进行股神经穿刺并留置导管,术后48 h内持续镇痛、后期（至术后7天）负荷剂量镇痛;静脉组留置静脉自控镇痛泵至术后48 h,后期采取肌肉注射药物镇痛。观察指标包括：术后6、12、24、48 h以及3～7 d的膝关节疼痛程度（静息、活动）;术后3～7 d患侧膝关节活动度;术后不良反应发生率。结果在12、24、48 h,阻滞组的疼痛程度平均小于静脉组,且差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）;术后3～7 d的静息痛两组之间差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）,而阻滞组的活动痛疼痛程度平均小于静脉组,且差异有显著统计学意义（ P＜0.01）;阻滞组术后3～7 d膝关节的活动度明显大于静脉组,且差异有统计学意义（ P＜0.05）;静脉组出现副反应的比率明显大于阻滞组,且差异有统计学意义（ P＜0.05）。结论围手术期多模式联合镇痛已经成为共识;股神经阻滞镇痛在围手术期临床效果明显,具有操作方便、安全性高、副作用少、利于锻炼等优点。     

围术期帕瑞昔布钠对全膝关节置换术后疼痛和功能恢复的影响

目的本研究评估帕瑞昔布钠对全膝关节置换术后疼痛和功能恢复的影响。方法择期行全膝关节置换术的患者30例。所有患者均于麻醉前行股神经置管,然后于L3～4间隙穿刺行腰-硬联合麻醉。患者被随机分为两组:帕瑞昔布钠联合连续股神经镇痛组(PF组)和连续股神经镇痛组(F组),其中PF组于切皮前15min和术后12h给予帕瑞昔布钠40mg,F组给予生理盐水。术后对两组患者的静息和运动时的VAS评分以及膝关节主动活动度进行评估。结果术后静息时两组VAS评分相似;而运动时的各时点VAS评分PF组显著低于F组(P<0.05),同时膝关节的主动活动度PF组显著高于F组(P<0.05)。结论联合应用帕瑞昔布钠的多模式镇痛提高了全膝关节置换术后股神经镇痛的效果,有利于患者运动功能的恢复,对出血无明显影响。     

An Innovative Pain Control Method Using Peripheral Nerve Block and Patient-Controlled Analgesia With Ketorolac After Bone Surgery in the Ankle Area: A Prospective Study

Although postoperative pain is inevitable after bone surgery, there is no general consensus regarding its ideal management. We hypothesized that the combination of ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve block (PNB) and patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with ketorolac would be useful for pain control and reducing opioid usage. This prospective study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of this method. This study included 95 patients aged >18 years who underwent bone surgery in the ankle area from June to December 2018. All operations were performed under anesthetic PNB, and additional PNB was given for pain control ∼11 hours after preoperative PNB. An additional PCA with ketorolac, started before rebound pain was experienced, was used for pain control in group A (49 patients) but not group B (46 patients). We used intramuscular injection with pethidine or ketorolac as rescue analgesics if pain persisted. A visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain was used to quantify pain at 6, 12, 18, 24, 36, 48, and 72 hours postoperatively. Patient satisfaction was assessed, along with side effects in both groups. VAS pain scores differed significantly between the groups at 24 hours after the operation (p = .013). All patients in group A were satisfied with the pain control method; however, 5 patients in group B were dissatisfied (p = .001), 3 owing to severe postoperative pain and 2 owing to postoperative nausea and vomiting. An average of 0.75 and 11.40 mg pethidine per patient was used in groups A and B, respectively, for 3 days. We concluded that the combined use of ultrasound-guided PNB and PCA with ketorolac can be an effective postoperative method of pain control that can reduce opioid usage.     

针刺疗法结合手法对颈源性头痛镇痛时效的观察

目的:观察针刺疗法结合手法与单纯手法治疗颈源性头痛的疗效差异,验证手法与针刺疗法针刺的协同效应.方法:将颈源性头痛患者60例分为针刺疗法结合手法组(A组)和手法组(B组).A组30例,男12例,女18例,年龄(41.37±12.09)岁,病程(23.73±15.54)个月;B组30例,男14例,女16例,年龄(42.4...