...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Pain Research >Ultrasound-Guided Corticosteroid Injection in Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: Comparison Between Radial and Ulnar Approaches
【24h】

Ultrasound-Guided Corticosteroid Injection in Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: Comparison Between Radial and Ulnar Approaches

机译:超声引导的皮质类固醇液注射腕管综合征:径向和尺骨方法之间的比较

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Purpose: To compare two common approaches for ultrasonography (US)-guided injection. Patients and Methods: Sixty patients with mild-to-moderate CTS were included in this double-blind randomized controlled trial (RCT). They received a single shot of corticosteroid injection through either the US-guided in-plane approach: radial or ulnar side. Participants were evaluated using Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (BCTQ) and visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, as well as electrodiagnosis (EDX) and US parameters before the intervention, and within 12 weeks of follow-up. Results: In both groups, all outcomes, except for the electrodiagnostic measures, significantly improved within the follow-up. Pain-VAS and both subscales of BCTQ questionnaire, as our main subjective outcomes, revealed dramatic improvement, with the largest amount of changes in VAS (70%; comparing to baseline value), and about 37% for both of BQSS and BQFS scales, all indicating superiority of radial to ulnar in-plane approach. During the first follow-up, we did not detect any remarkable preference between the groups in either subjective or electrodiagnostic variables. However, there was a significant difference at next follow-up time-points in terms of VAS for pain and BQFS favoring radial approach (Table 3). Furthermore, US-measured parameters including nerve-circumference and CSA improved only in the radial in-plane group. Conclusion: The current data proved that radial in-plane approach for CTS injection could be at least as effective as the more common ulnar in-plane method. Even the pain-relief effect was longer for the radial in-plane approach. Also, patients’ functional status and objective variables all revealed better outcomes via the new approach.
机译:目的:比较超声检查(US) - 指导注射的两种常见方法。患者和方法:在这种双盲随机对照试验(RCT)中包含60例轻度至中等CTS的患者。他们通过联合国面内方法进行了一次皮质类固醇注射的一次射击:径向或尺尺侧。参与者使用波士顿腕管隧道调查问卷(BCTQ)和视觉模拟量表(VAS)进行疼痛,以及在干预前的电源诊断(EDX)和美国参数,在后续后续12周内。结果:在两组中,除了电源措施外,所有结果,在随访中明显改善。作为我们的主要主观结果,BCTQ调查问卷的痛苦和止痛调查问卷揭示了戏剧性的改善,VAS中最大的变化(70%;与基线值相比),BQSS和BQFS秤的约37%,所有表明径向径向面内方法的优越性。在第一次随访期间,我们没有检测到任何主观性或电源变量中的组之间的任何显着偏好。然而,在疼痛和BQFS有利于径向方法的VAS方面存在显着差异(表3)。此外,在径向面内组中仅改善了包括神经圆周和CSA的美国测量参数。结论:目前的数据证明了CTS注入的径向面内方法可能至少与更常见的ulnar面内方法一样有效。即使是疼痛缓解效果也适用于径向面内方法。此外,患者的功能状况和客观变量都通过新方法揭示了更好的结果。

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