...
首页> 外文期刊>Pain Physician >Assessment of Prevalence of Cervical Facet Joint Pain with Diagnostic Cervical Medial Branch Blocks Analysis Based on Chronic Pain Model
【24h】

Assessment of Prevalence of Cervical Facet Joint Pain with Diagnostic Cervical Medial Branch Blocks Analysis Based on Chronic Pain Model

机译:基于慢性疼痛模型的诊断宫颈内侧分支分析评估宫颈外关节疼痛的患病率

获取原文

摘要

BACKGROUND:Research into cervical spinal pain syndromes has indicated that the cervical facet joints can be a potent source of neck pain, headache, and referred pain into the upper extremities. There have been multiple diagnostic accuracy studies, most commonly utilizing diagnostic facet joint nerve blocks and an acute pain model, as Bogduk has proposed. Subsequently, Manchikanti has focused on the importance of the chronic pain model and longer lasting relief with diagnostic blocks. OBJECTIVE: To assess diagnostic accuracy of cervical facet joint nerve blocks with controlled comparative local anesthetic blocks, with updated assessment of prevalence, false-positive rate, and a description of philosophical paradigm shift from acute to chronic pain model, with concordant pain relief. STUDY DESIGN: This diagnostic accuracy study was performed with retrospective assessment of data to assess prevalence and false-positive rates. SETTING: The study was performed in a non-university-based, multidisciplinary, interventional pain management, private practice in the United States. METHODS: Cervical medial branch blocks were performed utilizing lidocaine 1% followed by bupivacaine 0.25% when appropriate response was obtained in an operating room under fluoroscopic guidance with 0.5 mL of lidocaine or bupivacaine from C3-C6 medial branches (levels blocked on joints involved). If a patient failed to respond to lidocaine with appropriate >= 80% pain relief, that patient was considered as negative for facet joint pain. If the response was positive with lidocaine block, a bupivacaine block was performed. RESULTS: The chronic cervical facet joint pain was diagnosed with cervical facet joint nerve blocks at a prevalence of 49.3% (95% CI, 43.6%, 55.0%) and with a false-positive rate of 25.6% (95% CI, 19.5%, 32.8%). This study also showed a single block prevalence rate of 66.3% (95% CI, 71.7%, 60.9%). Assessment of the duration of relief with each block showed greater than 80% for 6 days with lidocaine block and total relief of >= 50% of 31 days. In contrast, with bupivacaine, average duration of pain relief of >= 80% was 12 days with a total relief of >= 50% lasting for 55 days. CONCLUSION: Based on this investigation, utilizing a chronic pain model, there was significant difference in the relief patterns. This assessment showed prevalence and false-positive rates of 49.3% and 25.6% in chronic neck pain. Duration of relief >= 80% pain relief was 6 days with lidocaine and 12 days with bupivacaine, with total relief of >= 50% of 31 days with 55 days respectively.
机译:背景:研究宫颈脊髓疼痛综合征表明,宫颈面关节可以是颈部疼痛,头痛和引用上肢疼痛的有效源。正如Bogduk所提出的那样,已经有多种诊断准确性研究,最常用的诊断面关节神经块和急性疼痛模型。随后,Manchikanti专注于慢性疼痛模型的重要性以及持久缓解诊断块。目的:评估宫颈面关节神经块与受控对比局部麻醉块的诊断准确性,更新评估患病率,假阳性率,以及从急性对慢性疼痛模型的哲学范式转变的描述,疼痛缓解。研究设计:通过回顾性评估数据进行这种诊断准确性研究,以评估患病率和假阳性率。环境:该研究是以非大学为基础的,多学科,介入疼痛管理,美国私人实践进行。方法:利用Lidocaine 1%进行宫颈内侧分支嵌段,然后在用0.5ml Liatocaine或Bupivacaine的荧光透视引导下在手术室中得到适当的响应,从C3-C6内侧分支中获得适当的响应(涉及的关节梗接头堵塞的水平)。如果患者未能应对Lidocaine的疼痛缓解,则认为患者被认为是面关节疼痛的阴性。如果响应与利多卡因嵌段呈阳性,则进行Bupivacaine块。结果:慢性宫颈面关节疼痛被诊断患有宫颈面关节神经块,其患病率为49.3%(95%CI,43.6%,55.0%),假阳性率为25.6%(95%CI,19.5% 32.8%)。本研究还显示出66.3%(95%CI,71.7%,60.9%)的单嵌段患病率。利用利多卡因块,每种块的减轻持续时间评估大于80%,并达到80%的总缓解,= 50%31天。相比之下,随着Bupivacaine,疼痛缓解的平均持续时间> = 80%是12天,总缓解>持续55天。结论:根据该调查,利用慢性疼痛模型,浮雕模式有显着差异。该评估显示患有患病率和慢性颈部疼痛的49.3%和25.6%的假率。救济持续时间> = 80%的疼痛缓解6天,利多卡因和Bupivacaine 12天,分别与55天的总缓解> = 50%31天。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号