|本期目录/Table of Contents|

[1]黄 洪,储 辉,李 波,等.颈2脊神经节脉冲射频与颈2横突阻滞治疗颈源性头痛的疗效比较[J].医学研究与战创伤救治(原医学研究生学报),2012,14(04):294-296.
　HUANG Hong,CHU Hui,LI Bo,et al.A comparative study of C2 ganglion pulsed radiofrequency with C2 transverse block treatment of cervicogenic headache clinical efficacy[J].JOURNAL OF MEDICALRESEARCH —COMBAT TRAUMA CARE,2012,14(04):294-296.
点击复制

颈2脊神经节脉冲射频与颈2横突阻滞治疗颈源性头痛的疗效比较()
分享到62.8K

《医学研究与战创伤救治》（原医学研究生学报）[ISSN:1672-271X/CN:32-1713/R]

卷:
第14卷
期数:
2012年04期
页码:
294-296
栏目:
出版日期:
2012-07-20

文章信息/Info

Title:
A comparative study of C2 ganglion pulsed radiofrequency with C2 transverse block treatment of cervicogenic headache clinical efficacy
文章编号:
1672-271X(2012)04-0294-03
作者:
黄 洪; 储 辉; 李 波; 俞 航; 徐志久
215007 江苏苏州，解放军101医院100临床部微创骨科
Author(s):
HUANG Hong; CHU Hui; LI Bo; YU Hang; XU Zhi-jiu
Department of Minimally Invasive Orthopedics,100 Clinical Branch of 101 Hospital of PLA,Suzhou,Jiangsu 215007,China
关键词:
颈源性头痛; 颈2脊神经节; 脉冲射频; 颈2横突阻滞
Keywords:
cervicogenic headache;  C2 ganglion;  pulsed radiofrequency;  C2 transverse block
分类号:
R651.3
DOI:
-
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
目的 比较颈2脊神经节脉冲射频与颈2横突阻滞治疗颈源性头痛(cervicogenic headache，CEH)的临床疗效。方法 将确诊为CEH的52例随机分为观察组和对照组各26例。观察组采用颈2脊神经节脉冲射频治疗，对照组采用颈2横突阻滞治疗。以视觉模拟评分法(VAS)评估并纪录两组治疗前与治疗后5个月疼痛评分。结果 两组治疗后与治疗前VAS评分比较，均有下降，其中观察组下降了(6.42±0.68)，对照组下降了(3.64±0.57)，观察组下降程度较对照组明显，差异有统计学意义(P﹤0.05)。 观察组治愈率为84.62%，对照组治愈率为57.69%，两组比较，差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 颈2脊神经节脉冲射频治疗CEH效果显著，优于颈2横突阻滞治疗。
Abstract:
Objective To compare the clinical efficacy in treatment of cervicogenic headache(CHE) by using C2 ganglion pulsed and C2 transverse block radiofrequency.Methods 52 patients diagnosed as CEH were randomly divided into two groups.Each group has 26 patients.Test group uses C2 ganglion PRF treatment and control group uses C2 transverse block.A visual analog scale (VAS) was used to assess and record pain scores before and 5 months after treatment.Results The VAS score 5 months after treatment compared with before treatment was decreased.The difference was statistically significant (P<0.05).The VAS score in observation group decreased (6.42±0.68) points and in the control group decreased (3.64±0.57) points.The difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P<0.05).The cure rate in observation group was 84.62% and the cure rate in control group was 57.69%.Two groups of comparisons,the difference was statistically significance (P<0.05).Conclusion The efficacy in treatment of CEH using C2 ganglion PRF is significant high than that using C2 transverse block.

参考文献/References:

[1]Antonaci F，Sjaastad O．Cervicogenic headache:a real headache［J］.Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep,2011,11(2):149-155．
[2］Biondi DM.Cervicogenic headache:a review of diagnostic and reatment strategies［J］.J AM Osteopath Assoc，2005,105(4 Suppl 2):16S-22S.
[3］Bogduk N，Govind J．Cervicogenic headache:an assessment of the evidence on clinical diagnosis,invasivetests,and treatment［J］.Lancet Neur,2009,8(10):959-968.
[4］常蜀英.重视颈源性头痛的诊断与治疗［J］.空军总医院学报,2005,21(2):96-99.
[5］王 晶．颈2横突注射镇痛液治疗颈源性头痛的疗效观察［J］.临床医学,2010,23(7):122．
[6］姚 军，郭小俊，李前进，等．颈2、颈1脊神经节阻滞治疗颈源性头痛的临床观察［J］.中国疼痛医学杂志,2008,14(1):51-52.
[7］何明伟，倪家骧.脉冲射频治疗慢性疼痛进展［J］.颈腰痛杂志,2007,28(6):519-521.
[8］Malik K,Benzon HT.Radiofrequency applications to dorsal root ganglia:a literature revie［J］.Anesthesiology,2008,109(3):527-542.
[9］Bilge O.An anatomic and morphometric study of C2 never root ganglion and its corresponding foramen［J］.Spine,2004,29(5):495-499.

相似文献/References:

[1]陆 琴,张 莎,孙艳萍,等.射频治疗颈源性头痛的护理体会[J].医学研究与战创伤救治(原医学研究生学报),2013,15(01):74.

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
南京军区医药卫生科研基金项目(11MA0028)
更新日期/Last Update: 2012-07-20