Radiculopathy

神经根病
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    作者报告了他们对21例表现为腰椎间盘突出症的症状和影像学特征的连续患者的经验;其中,在手术的时候有一个血管环。该手术对14名女性和7名男性进行,平均年龄为39岁。临床投诉包括所有患者的腰椎疼痛伴一条肢体明显的神经根病;在2例中有额外的括约肌功能障碍。症状在平均三个月内出现。在所有患者中,椎间盘通过L5-S1(n=10);L4-L5(n=5)和L3-L4(n=6)开放最小椎板切开术暴露。在16名患者中,而不是椎间盘突出,他们有腰椎硬膜外静脉曲张,而在其余5例中发现了动静脉瘘。在所有情况下,切除血管疾病,其下方的椎间盘完好无损。一名患者术后输血。虽然神经根病功能障碍在所有患者中都得到了改善,4例患者报告了手术后持续的腰椎疼痛.术后成像证实了血管异常和完整椎间盘的分辨率。平均随访时间为47个月。在影像学研究中,腰椎区域的硬膜外静脉曲张或动静脉瘘都可能模仿椎间盘突出。使用通常的技术,他们可以安全地操作。切除异常足以减轻神经根病的症状。
    The authors report their experience with twenty-one consecutive patients who presented with symptoms and imaging characteristics of a herniated lumbar disc; of whom, at the time of surgery had a vascular loop instead. The procedure was performed on 14 women and seven men with a mean age of 39 years. Clinical complaints included lumbar aching with one limb overt radiculopathy in all patients; with additional sphincter dysfunction in two cases. Symptoms had developed within a mean period of three months. In all patients, the disc was exposed through an L5-S1 (n = 10); L4-L5 (n = 5) and L3-L4 (n = 6) open minimal laminotomy. In 16 patients, rather than a herniated disc they had a lumbar epidural varix, while an arterio-venous fistula was found in the remaining five cases. In all cases, the vascular disorder was resected and its subjacent disc was left intact. One patient had a postoperative blood transfusion. While the radiculopathy dysfunction improved in all patients, four patients reported lasting lumbar pain following surgery. The postoperative imaging confirmed the resolution of the vascular anomaly and an intact disc. The mean length of the follow-up period was 47 months. Either epidural varix or arterio-venous fistula in the lumbar area may mimic a herniated disc on imaging studies. With the usual technique they can be operated safely. Resection of the anomaly can be sufficient for alleviating radiculopathy symptoms.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    神经根型颈椎病可能会影响手指的运动和灵活性。比较C8神经根病与其他神经根病的术后特征和临床结果未知。这项前瞻性多中心研究分析了359例因单纯神经根病接受单级手术的患者(C5,48;C6,132;C7,149;C8,30)。收集背景数据以及术后1年的颈部残疾指数(NDI)和数字评定量表(NRS)评分。C5-7和C8神经根病组在倾向评分匹配后进行比较,具有由最小临床重要差异(MCID)确定的临床意义。术后手臂麻木明显高于上背部或颈部麻木,在C5-8神经根病组中,手术后手臂疼痛减轻最多(3.4分)。C8神经根病组术后NDI评分较差(p=0.026),上背部疼痛(p=0.042),手臂疼痛NRS评分的变化(p=0.021),和上背部麻木(p=0.028)比C5-7组。NDI在两组中均实现了MCID,但C8组颈部和手臂疼痛NRS未达到MCID。总之,尽管手臂麻木持续存在,颈神经根病手术后手臂疼痛缓解。与C5-7神经根病患者相比,C8神经根病患者的NDI和NRS手臂疼痛评分变化更差。
    Cervical radiculopathy might affect finger movement and dexterity. Postoperative features and clinical outcomes comparing C8 radiculopathies with other radiculopathies are unknown. This prospective multicenter study analyzed 359 patients undergoing single-level surgery for pure cervical radiculopathy (C5, 48; C6, 132; C7, 149; C8, 30). Background data and pre- and 1-year postoperative neck disability index (NDI) and numerical rating scale (NRS) scores were collected. The C5-7 and C8 radiculopathy groups were compared after propensity score matching, with clinical significance determined by minimal clinically important differences (MCID). Postoperative arm numbness was significantly higher than upper back or neck numbness, and arm pain was reduced the most (3.4 points) after surgery among the C5-8 radiculopathy groups. The C8 radiculopathy group had worse postoperative NDI scores (p = 0.026), upper back pain (p = 0.042), change in arm pain NRS scores (p = 0.021), and upper back numbness (p = 0.028) than the C5-7 group. NDI achieved MCID in both groups, but neck and arm pain NRS did not achieve MCID in the C8 group. In conclusion, although arm numbness persisted, arm pain was relieved after surgery for cervical radiculopathy. Patients with C8 radiculopathy exhibited worse NDI and change in NRS arm pain score than those with C5-7 radiculopathy.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:疼痛是椎间盘诱发的腰骶部神经根病(LSR)致残的主要原因,与神经营养因子主要是脑源性神经营养因子(BDNF)有关。然而,据我们所知,在椎间盘诱导的LSR中评估血清BDNF之前尚未报道。本研究旨在研究LSR患者的血清BDNF及其与疼痛严重程度和功能障碍的关系。
    方法:本病例对照研究包括40例椎间盘诱导的LSR患者和40例年龄和性别匹配的健康受试者。所有患者均接受神经学检查,电生理评估,使用数字评定量表(NRS)进行疼痛严重程度评估,并使用改良的Oswestry下腰痛残疾指数(ODI)和缅因州-西雅图背部问卷(MSBQ)进行功能残疾评估。根据Douleur神经病变4(DN4)问卷,患者分为神经性疼痛和非神经性疼痛.采用酶联免疫吸附法测定所有参与者的血清BDNF。
    结果:LSR患者血清BDNF明显高于健康对照组(U=272.5,P<0.001)。此外,神经性疼痛患者的血清BDNF明显高于非神经性疼痛患者(U=35,P=0.03)。急性疼痛患者血清BDNF与NRS评分呈正相关(rs=0.537,P=0.026)。然而,慢性疼痛患者之间没有显著相关性。此外,BDNF与改良ODI和MSBQ无显著相关性。
    结论:在椎间盘诱导的LSR中,血清BDNF升高可能与神经性疼痛和急性疼痛严重程度有关。然而,它可能与慢性疼痛严重程度或功能性残疾无关。
    BACKGROUND: Pain is the major cause of disability in disc induced lumbosacral radiculopathy (LSR) and is related to neurotrophins mainly brain derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF). However, to our knowledge evaluating serum BDNF in disc induced LSR has not been reported before. This study was done to investigate serum BDNF in LSR patients and its relation to pain severity and functional disability.
    METHODS: This case-control study included 40 disc induced LSR patients and 40 age and sex matched healthy subjects. All patients were subjected to neurological examination, electrophysiological evaluation, pain severity assessment using numerical rating scale (NRS) and functional disability assessment using Modified Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Index (ODI) and Maine-Seattle Back Questionnaire (MSBQ). According to Douleur neuropathique 4 (DN4) questionnaire, patients were divided into those with neuropathic pain and those with non-neuropathic pain. Serum BDNF was measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in all participants.
    RESULTS: Serum BDNF was significantly higher in LSR patients than in healthy controls (U=272.5, P<0.001). Moreover, serum BDNF was significantly higher in those with neuropathic pain compared to those with non-neuropathic pain (U=35, P=0.03). Serum BDNF had a significant positive correlation with NRS score among those with acute pain (rs=0.537, P=0.026), however there was no significant correlation among those with chronic pain. Furthermore, BDNF had no significant correlation with modified ODI and MSBQ.
    CONCLUSIONS: Increased serum BDNF may be associated with neuropathic pain and acute pain severity in disc induced LSR. However, it may not be related to chronic pain severity or functional disability.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:大多数神经根型颈椎病患者在没有治疗或非手术治疗的情况下在最初几个月内得到改善。系统评价得出结论,这些患者改善,不管他们的干预。尽管如此,许多患者接受手术,尽管关于手术治疗适应症的证据有限。本文的目的是描述一项随机对照试验(RCT)的非手术治疗组中将要遵循的干预措施,比较手术和非手术治疗对神经根型颈椎病患者的有效性。
    方法:非手术干预是建立在先前经验基础上的认知方法中的功能性干预,以及目前对肌肉骨骼疼痛和颈神经根病的最佳实践护理的建议。它是基于生物心理社会而不是生物医学的观点,包括跨学科的方法(医生,理疗专家),包括简短的干预和分级活动。干预包括为期12周的6次会议。首要目标是第一,为了验证患者的症状并建立治疗联盟,第二,探索理解和推广替代方案,第三,根据患者的症状和功能探索问题和机会。自我管理的激励因素具有挑战性。我们将尝试在为个体患者计划进度时进行共享决策,并强调学习实用的自助策略和鼓励保持活跃(加强积极的自然过程)。一般的身体活动,如步行,将与颈部和肩部区域的简单功能锻炼一起推广。我们还将探索社交活动,合并症,疼痛位置,睡眠,和工作相关的因素。医疗服务提供者将与每个患者一起设定个性化目标。
    结论:干预的目的是在认知方法中描述慢性神经根病患者的功能干预。本计划的有效性将在随机对照试验中与手术进行比较。
    BACKGROUND: Most patients with cervical radiculopathy improve within the first months without treatment or with non-surgical treatment. A systematic review concluded that these patients improve, regardless of their intervention. Still, many patients are offered surgery, despite limited evidence regarding the indications for surgical treatments. The aim of this article is to describe the intervention that is going to be followed in the non-surgical treatment arm of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing the effectiveness of surgical and non-surgical treatment for patients with cervical radiculopathy.
    METHODS: The non-surgical intervention is a functional intervention within a cognitive approach founded on previous experiences, and current recommendations for best practice care of musculoskeletal pain and cervical radiculopathy. It is based on the biopsychosocial rather than a biomedical perspective, comprises an interdisciplinary approach (physicians, physiotherapy specialists), and includes brief intervention and graded activities. The intervention consists of 6 sessions over 12 weeks. The primary goals are first, to validate the patients´ symptoms and build a therapeutic alliance, second, to explore the understanding and promote alternatives, and third, to explore problems and opportunities based on patients´ symptoms and function. Motivational factors toward self-management are challenging. We will attempt shared decision-making in planning progress for the individual patient and emphasise learning of practical self-help strategies and encouragement to stay active (reinforcing the positive natural course). General physical activities such as walking will be promoted along with simple functional exercises for the neck- and shoulder region. We will also explore social activity, comorbidities, pain location, sleep, and work-related factors. The health providers will set individualised goals together with each patient.
    CONCLUSIONS: The aim of the intervention is to describe a functional intervention within a cognitive approach for patients with chronic cervical radiculopathy. The effectiveness of the present program will be compared to surgery in a randomised controlled trial.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • DOI:
    文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:颗粒类固醇被认为在注射部位长时间发挥作用。然而,当用于硬膜外类固醇注射时,这些类型的类固醇具有更高的风险。灾难性脊髓并发症,包括突然发作的截瘫,据报道,由于血管内颗粒类固醇制剂引起血管栓塞和闭塞,导致脊髓梗塞.临床医生,因此,推荐非颗粒类固醇来减轻这些不良事件.据我们所知,这是首次针对甲基强的松龙的有效性和安全性的回顾性研究,地塞米松,和倍他米松用于经椎间孔硬膜外类固醇注射(TFESI)治疗腰椎神经根病。
    目的:本研究的主要目的是比较在初次注射后12个月内接受颗粒类固醇注射并需要零重复注射的患者比例与接受非颗粒类固醇注射并需要零重复注射的患者比例。以及比较微粒队列中在初次注射后12个月内需要一次或多次重复注射的患者人数与非微粒队列中需要一次或多次重复注射的患者人数。次要目标是评估最终需要手术的患者比例。
    方法:这是一个单中心,IRB批准,回顾性研究评估了非颗粒类固醇药物与颗粒类固醇药物在TFESI中作为慢性腰椎神经根病的微创治疗时的安全性和有效性。
    方法:本研究收集了4年时间范围内(2018年1月15日至2022年1月15日)的数据(n=1717)。
    方法:从每个患者的图表中收集以下数据:年龄,性别,BMI,种族,初次注射的日期,在初次注射的12个月内,在相同的腰骶水平和同一侧重复注射的次数,和腰椎手术日期(如适用)。纳入标准包括:1)具有神经根病因的慢性下腰痛;2)至少18岁;3)在12周后经历过保守治疗失败(包括物理治疗和/或药物治疗);4)具有支持神经撞击的积极体格检查结果(直腿抬高,坍落度测试);5)显示腰椎间盘突出症神经撞击的腰椎MRI证据。排除标准包括:1)先前接受过任何水平的腰椎手术(L1-S1);2)在初次注射前不到6个月接受过TFESI;3)在拟议的注射部位感染了全身性感染;4)接受了积极的癌症治疗;5)接受了任何其他脊柱注射。
    结果:非颗粒类固醇队列中接受0次重复注射的患者比例明显更高(87.5%vs71.4%,P<0.001)。颗粒类固醇队列显示在初次注射后12个月内接受重复注射的患者比例明显更高(12.5%vs29.6%,P<0.001)。两组之间需要手术的患者之间没有显着差异。其他结果指标包括识别与重复注射显著相关的危险因素。年龄与重复注射之间存在统计学上的弱正相关(Pearsoncorr=0.102;P<0.001),种族/种族与重复注射之间存在弱负相关(双点corr=-0.093;P<0.001)。未报告不良事件。
    结论:本研究中并非所有临床医生都使用了3种类固醇类型中的每一种,所有临床医生都只使用微粒或非微粒类固醇。
    结论:我们的研究表明,当使用两种药物治疗腰椎神经根病时,与非颗粒类固醇的TFESI相关的临床结果优于与颗粒类固醇的TFESI相关的临床结果。这是第一项使用侧向性信息的临床有用预测模型的研究,年龄,和类固醇类型。
    BACKGROUND: Particulate steroids are thought to exert their effects for long durations at injection sites. However, these types of steroids carry higher risks when used in epidural steroid injections. Catastrophic spinal cord complications, including sudden-onset paraplegia, have been reported due to intravascular particulate steroid preparations that cause embolisms and occlusion of blood vessels, resulting in spinal cord infarctions. Clinicians, therefore, recommend nonparticulate steroids to mitigate these adverse events. To our knowledge, this is the first retrospective study that addresses the effectiveness and safety of methylprednisolone, dexamethasone, and betamethasone when used in transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESIs) for the treatment of lumbar radiculopathy.
    OBJECTIVE: The primary goal of this study was to compare the proportion of patients who received injections of particulate steroids and required zero repeat injections within 12 months of their initial injection to the proportion of patients who received injections of nonparticulate steroids and also required zero repeat injections, as well as to compare the number of patients in the particulate cohort who required one or more repeat injections within 12 months of their initial injection to the number of patients in the nonparticulate cohort who required the same. The secondary goal was to evaluate the proportion of patients ultimately requiring surgery.
    METHODS: This is a single-center, IRB-approved, retrospective study evaluating the safety and effectiveness of nonparticulate as compared to particulate steroid medications when used in TFESIs as minimally invasive treatments for chronic lumbar radiculopathy.
    METHODS: This study captured data (n = 1717) over a 4-year time frame (01/15/2018 to 01/15/2022).
    METHODS: The following data were collected from each patient\'s chart: age, gender, BMI, race, date of initial injection, number of repeat injections at the same lumbosacral level and on the same side within 12 months of the initial injection, and lumbar surgery date (if applicable). Inclusion criteria included: 1) having chronic low back pain of radicular etiology; 2) being at least 18 years old; 3) having experienced the failure of conservative therapy after 12 weeks (including physical therapy and/or medications); 4) having positive physical exam findings supporting nerve impingement (straight leg raise, slump test); and 5) showing lumbar MRI evidence of nerve impingement from disc herniation. Exclusion criteria included: 1) having received prior lumbar surgery at any level (L1-S1); 2) having been given prior TFESIs fewer than 6 months prior to initial injection; 3) having contracted a systemic infection at the proposed injection site; 4) undergoing active cancer treatment; and 5) having gotten any other spine injections.
    RESULTS: A significantly greater proportion of patients in the nonparticulate steroid cohort received 0 repeat injections (87.5% vs 71.4%, P < 0.001). The particulate steroid cohort demonstrated a significantly greater proportion of patients who received repeat injections within 12 months after the initial injections (12.5% vs 29.6%, P < 0.001). There were no significant differences among patients requiring surgery between the 2 cohorts. Other outcome measures included the identification of risk factors significantly associated with repeat injections. There was a statistically significant weak positive correlation between age and repeat injections (Pearson corr = 0.102; P < 0.001) and a weak negative correlation between ethnicity/race and repeat injections (point-biserial corr = -0.093; P < 0.001).  No adverse events were reported.
    CONCLUSIONS: Not all clinicians included in this study used each of the 3 steroid types, and all clinicians used either particulate or nonparticulate steroids exclusively.
    CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that the clinical outcomes associated with TFESIs of nonparticulate steroids are superior to those associated with TFESIs of particulate steroids when either variety of medication is used to treat lumbar radiculopathy. This is the first study to include a clinically useful predictive model using information on laterality, age, and steroid type.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:观察微创颈后路椎间孔切开术(MI-PCF)和颈前路椎间盘切除融合术(ACDF)治疗单节段单侧神经根病(SLUCR)的临床疗效和安全性。
    方法:我们回顾性分析了2020年2月至2022年2月两家医院的81例SLUCR患者,包括MI-PCF组(n=40)和ACDF组(n=41)。颈部和肩部疼痛的差异,视觉模拟评分(VAS),上肢放射痛(VAS),比较颈部残疾指数(NDI)。手术时间,术中出血,住院,比较两组患者的并发症。
    结果:ACDF组术后1天的颈肩疼痛缓解程度优于MI-PCF组(p<0.05),而两组在1个月时颈肩疼痛缓解方面无显著差异,3个月,6个月,术后12个月,(p>0.05)。1天时两组上肢放射痛的缓解和NDI评分的降低无显著性差异,1个月,3个月,6个月,术后12个月(p>0.05)。MI-PCF组患者手术时间短,出血少,缩短住院时间,差异有统计学意义(p<0.05)。两组并发症发生率无统计学差异。(p>0.05)。
    结论:MI-PCF和ACDF治疗SLUCR的临床疗效和安全性均满意。同时,MI-PCF手术时间短,与ACDF相比,出血少,住院时间短,值得临床推广。
    OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to observe the clinical efficacy and safety of minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy (MI-PCF) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in the treatment of single-level unilateral cervical radiculopathy (SLUCR).
    METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 81 patients with SLUCR in two hospitals from February 2020 to February 2022, including the MI-PCF group (n=40) and the ACDF group (n=41). The differences in neck and shoulder pain, visual analog score (VAS), upper limb radiating pain (VAS), and neck disability index (NDI) were compared. Operative time, intraoperative bleeding, hospital stay, and complications were also compared between the two groups.
    RESULTS: The degree of neck and shoulder pain relief at 1 day postoperatively was better in the ACDF group than in the MI-PCF group (p<0.05), while there were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of neck and shoulder pain relief at 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months postoperatively, (p>0.05). There were no significant differences in the relief of upper limb radiating pain and the decrease of NDI scores between the two groups at 1 day, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after surgery (p>0.05). The patients in MI-PCF group had shorter operative time, less bleeding, and shorter hospital stay, which were statistically different (p<0.05). There was no statistical difference in the complication rate between the two groups, (p>0.05).
    CONCLUSIONS: The clinical efficacy and safety of MI-PCF and ACDF in the treatment of SLUCR are satisfactory, meanwhile, MI-PCF has shorter operative time, less bleeding and shorter hospital stay than ACDF, which is worthy of clinical promotion.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:颈椎病(CS),包括脊髓病和神经根病,是最常见的退行性颈椎疾病。本研究旨在评估与常规颈椎前路减压融合术(ACDF)相比,单侧双门静脉内窥镜(UBE)治疗单侧颈神经根病或单侧颈椎间盘突出症引起的并发颈脊髓病的临床疗效。
    方法:前瞻性,随机化,控制,进行了非劣效性试验.样本包括131例患者,他们在2021年9月至2022年9月期间接受了UBE或ACDF。将具有颈神经根或共存脊髓压迫症状和影像学定义的单侧颈神经根病或单侧颈椎间盘突出症引起的并发颈脊髓病的患者随机分为两组:UBE组(n=63)和ACDF组(n=68)。手术时间,失血,手术后住院时间,记录围手术期并发症。术前和术后改良日本骨科协会(mJOA)量表评分,视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分,颈部残疾指数(NDI)评分,mJOA的恢复率(RR)用于评估临床结局。
    结果:接受UBE治疗的患者术后住院时间明显短于接受ACDF治疗的患者(p<0.05)。颈部或手臂VAS评分无显著差异,NDI得分,MJOA得分,或两组间mJOA的平均RR(p<0.05)。两组仅观察到轻度并发症,无显著性差异(p=0.30)。
    结论:UBE可显著缓解疼痛和残疾,无严重并发症,大多数患者对这种技术感到满意。因此,该手术可安全有效地替代ACDF用于治疗单侧颈神经根病或单侧颈椎间盘突出症引起的并发颈脊髓病.
    背景:这项研究于2023年2月08日在中国临床试验注册中心注册(http://www.chictr.org.cn,#ChiCTR2300074273)。
    BACKGROUND: Cervical spondylosis (CS), including myelopathy and radiculopathy, is the most common degenerative cervical spine disease. This study aims to evaluate the clinical outcomes of unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) compared to those of conventional anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) for treating unilateral cervical radiculopathy or coexisting cervical myelopathy induced by unilateral cervical herniated discs.
    METHODS: A prospective, randomized, controlled, noninferiority trial was conducted. The sample consisted of 131 patients who underwent UBE or ACDF was conducted between September 2021 and September 2022. Patients with cervical nerve roots or coexisting spinal cord compression symptoms and imaging-defined unilateral cervical radiculopathy or coexisting cervical myelopathy induced by unilateral cervical herniated discs were randomized into two groups: a UBE group (n = 63) and an ACDF group (n = 68). The operative time, blood loss, length of hospital stay after surgery, and perioperative complications were recorded. Preoperative and postoperative modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) scale scores, visual analog scale (VAS) scores, neck disability index (NDI) scores, and recovery rate (RR) of the mJOA were utilized to evaluate clinical outcomes.
    RESULTS: The hospital stay after surgery was significantly shorter in patients treated with UBE than in those treated with ACDF (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in the neck or arm VAS score, NDI score, mJOA score, or mean RR of the mJOA between the two groups (p < 0.05). Only mild complications were observed in both groups, with no significant difference (p = 0.30).
    CONCLUSIONS: UBE can significantly relieve pain and disability without severe complications, and most patients are satisfied with this technique. Consequently, this procedure can be used safely and effectively as an alternative to ACDF for treating unilateral cervical radiculopathy or coexisting cervical myelopathy induced by unilateral cervical herniated discs.
    BACKGROUND: This study was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry on 02/08/2023 ( http://www.chictr.org.cn , #ChiCTR2300074273).
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:选择性神经根阻滞(SNRB)可作为腰椎神经根性疼痛的治疗和诊断工具。大多数研究仅通过其与疼痛减轻的关系来评估SNRB的效果。众所周知,疼痛与抑郁等其他因素有关,焦虑,不活动和睡眠障碍,但这些与患者相关的结局很少被评估.这项研究评估了SNRB对疼痛相关结果的影响,包括抑郁症。焦虑,疲劳,疼痛干扰,活动和睡眠。
    方法:用SNRB治疗130例腰椎神经根性疼痛患者。SNRB后12周(84天)用PROMIS-29评估患者报告的结果测量(PROMs)。在14天的随访中,根据患者的疼痛减轻情况将患者分层为响应者(疼痛减轻≥30%)和非响应者(疼痛减轻<30%)。使用Kaplan-Meier分析估计治疗后持续时间,其中返回基线作为事件。使用配对t检验以特定的时间间隔比较治疗前和治疗后的反应。
    结果:44%(n=45)的患者是应答者,在整个84天的随访中,所有参数均有显着改善。唯一的例外是在第70天失去意义的睡眠。应答者的平均治疗后持续时间为59(52-67)天。无反应者在第35天之前的疼痛干扰和疼痛强度以及在21天之前的社会参与能力方面显示出显着改善。
    结论:SNRB可以改善疼痛强度,疼痛干扰,物理功能,疲劳,焦虑,抑郁症,睡眠障碍和参与社会角色的能力。
    OBJECTIVE: Selective nerve root blocks (SNRB) are used both as a therapeutic and diagnostic tool for lumbar radicular pain. Most studies evaluate the effect of SNRB simply by its relation to pain reduction. It is well known that pain is associated with other factors such as depression, anxiety, inactivity and sleeping disorders, but these patient-related outcomes are seldom evaluated. This study evaluated the influence of SNRB on pain-related outcomes including depression, anxiety, fatigue, pain interference, activity and sleep.
    METHODS: One hundred three patients with lumbar radicular pain were treated with a SNRB. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were assessed with the PROMIS-29 for 12 weeks (84 days) following the SNRB. Patients were stratified based on their pain reduction at the 14-day follow up as responders (≥ 30% pain reduction) and non-responders (< 30% pain reduction). Post-treatment duration was estimated with the Kaplan-Meier analysis with return to baseline as an event. A paired t-test was used to compare pre- and post-treatment responses at specific time intervals.
    RESULTS: Forty-four percent (n = 45) of the patients were responders and showed significant improvement in all parameters throughout the 84-days follow-up, the exception was sleep that lost significance at day 70. The mean post-treatment duration among responders was 59 (52-67) days. Non-responders showed significant improvements in pain interference and pain intensity until day 35 and in ability for social participation until 21-day.
    CONCLUSIONS: SNRB can improve pain intensity, pain interference, physical function, fatigue, anxiety, depression, sleep disturbance and the ability to participate in social roles.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    ChatGPT是一种先进的语言AI,能够对有关神经根病的腰椎间盘突出症的临床问题做出回应。人工智能(AI)工具越来越多地被认为可以帮助临床医生做出决策。这项研究比较了ChatGPT-3.5和ChatGPT-4.0对已建立的NASS临床指南的反应,并评估了一致性。
    ChatGPT-3.5和ChatGPT-4.0在2012年NASS腰椎间盘突出症神经根病诊断和治疗临床指南中提示了15个问题。将分类的临床问题作为未修改的查询直接输入ChatGPT。语言输出由两名独立作者于2023年9月26日根据操作定义的准确性参数进行评估。过度结论性,补充,和不完整。通过卡方分析比较了ChatGPT-3.5和ChatGPT-4.0的性能。
    在ChatGPT-3.5产生的15个响应中,有7个(47%)是准确的,7名(47%)的结论过高,十五(100%)是补充的,和6(40%)是不完整的。对于ChatGPT-4.0,十个(67%)是准确的,5(33%)的结论过高,10人(67%)是补充的,和6(40%)是不完整的。补充信息有统计学上的显著差异(100%与67%;p=.014)在ChatGPT-3.5和ChatGPT-4.0之间。准确性(47%vs.67%;p=.269),过度结论性(47%与33%;p=.456),和不完整(40%与40%;p=1.000)在ChatGPT-3.5和ChatGPT-4.0之间没有显着差异。ChatGPT-3.5和ChatGPT-4.0对定义和病史以及体格检查类别均具有100%的准确性。ChatGPT-3.5的诊断测试准确率为0%,ChatGPT-4.0的诊断准确率为100%。非手术干预对ChatGPT-3.5的准确率为50%,对ChatGPT-4.0的准确率为63%。手术干预对ChatGPT-3.5的准确率为0%,对ChatGPT-4.0的准确率为33%。
    与ChatGPT-3.5相比,ChatGPT-4.0在问题类别中提供的补充信息更少,总体准确性更高。ChatGPT与NASS指南显示出合理的一致性,但临床医生应谨慎使用ChatGPT,因为它不能防止错误信息。
    UNASSIGNED: ChatGPT is an advanced language AI able to generate responses to clinical questions regarding lumbar disc herniation with radiculopathy. Artificial intelligence (AI) tools are increasingly being considered to assist clinicians in decision-making. This study compared ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4.0 responses to established NASS clinical guidelines and evaluated concordance.
    UNASSIGNED: ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4.0 were prompted with fifteen questions from The 2012 NASS Clinical Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of lumbar disc herniation with radiculopathy. Clinical questions organized into categories were directly entered as unmodified queries into ChatGPT. Language output was assessed by two independent authors on September 26, 2023 based on operationally-defined parameters of accuracy, over-conclusiveness, supplementary, and incompleteness. ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4.0 performance was compared via chi-square analyses.
    UNASSIGNED: Among the fifteen responses produced by ChatGPT-3.5, 7 (47%) were accurate, 7 (47%) were over-conclusive, fifteen (100%) were supplementary, and 6 (40%) were incomplete. For ChatGPT-4.0, ten (67%) were accurate, 5 (33%) were over-conclusive, 10 (67%) were supplementary, and 6 (40%) were incomplete. There was a statistically significant difference in supplementary information (100% vs. 67%; p=.014) between ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4.0. Accuracy (47% vs. 67%; p=.269), over-conclusiveness (47% vs. 33%; p=.456), and incompleteness (40% vs. 40%; p=1.000) did not show significant differences between ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4.0. ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4.0 both yielded 100% accuracy for definition and history and physical examination categories. Diagnostic testing yielded 0% accuracy for ChatGPT-3.5 and 100% accuracy for ChatGPT-4.0. Nonsurgical interventions had 50% accuracy for ChatGPT-3.5 and 63% accuracy for ChatGPT-4.0. Surgical interventions resulted in 0% accuracy for ChatGPT-3.5 and 33% accuracy for ChatGPT-4.0.
    UNASSIGNED: ChatGPT-4.0 provided less supplementary information and overall higher accuracy in question categories than ChatGPT-3.5. ChatGPT showed reasonable concordance to NASS guidelines, but clinicians should caution use of ChatGPT in its current state as it fails to safeguard against misinformation.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    北美脊柱学会(NASS)组装了第一个用于描述腰椎间盘疾病的综合命名系统,包括腰椎间盘突出症。这项研究的目的是(1)确定哪些NASS描述符最能预测显微椎间盘切除术后独立患者报告的结果,以及(2)确定每个NASS描述符的评估者间可靠性。
    对2014-2021年接受腰椎显微椎间盘切除术的成年患者(≥18岁)进行回顾性分析。术前收集患者报告的结果指标(PROM),3个月,和术后1年的时间点。使用针对椎间盘突出的NASS腰椎间盘命名法在术前MRI上对腰椎间盘突出症进行评估和分类。
    最终分析中包括了大约213例显微椎间盘切除术患者。表现出最大可靠性的疝气描述符包括隔离状态(κ=0.83),轴向椎间盘突出面积(κ=0.83),和侧向性(κ=0.83)。评分者间可靠性最低的描述符是迁移方向(κ=0.53)。3个月时,隔离疝与ODI(p=.004)和MCS(p=.032)的最小临床重要差异(MCID)的几率较低相关.12个月时,Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)MCID成就也观察到类似的趋势(p=.001)。3个月时,具有较大轴向面积的突出是ODI(p=.004)和心理分量总结(MCS)(p=.009)的MCID成就的预测因子。这两个协会都在12个月时持续存在;然而,较大的轴向椎间盘突出面积能够预测12个月时视觉模拟评分(VAS)腿部的MCID成就(p=0.031)。
    NASS命名系统在预测显微椎间盘切除术后结局方面的实用性还有待研究。我们表明,隔离状态和椎间盘面积都是可靠的,并且能够预测在手术后3个月和12个月的某些临床结果中实现MCID的几率。因此,腰椎间盘突出症的术前影像学分析可能有助于准确设定患者的期望.
    UNASSIGNED: The North American Spine Society (NASS) assembled the first ever comprehensive naming system for describing lumbar disc disease, including lumbar disc herniation. The objectives of this study were (1) to determine which NASS descriptors are most predictive of independent patient-reported outcomes after microdiscectomy and (2) to identify the inter-rater reliability of each NASS descriptor.
    UNASSIGNED: Adult patients (≥18 years) who underwent a lumbar microdiscectomy from 2014-2021 were retrospectively identified. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were collected at preoperative, 3-month, and 1-year postoperative time points. Lumbar disc herniations were evaluated and classified on preoperative MRI using the NASS lumbar disc nomenclature specific to disc herniation.
    UNASSIGNED: About 213 microdiscectomy patients were included in the final analysis. Herniation descriptors exhibiting the greatest reliability included sequestration status (κ=0.83), axial disc herniation area (κ=0.83), and laterality (κ=0.83). The descriptor with the lowest inter-rater reliability was direction of migration (κ=0.53). At 3 months, a sequestered herniation was associated with lower odds of achieving the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for ODI (p=.004) and MCS (p=.032). At 12 months, a similar trend was observed for Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) MCID achievement (p=.001). At 3 months, a herniation with larger axial area was a predictor of MCID achievement in ODI (p=.004) and the mental component summary (MCS) (p=.009). Neither association persisted at 12 months; however, larger axial disc herniation area was able to predict MCID achievement in the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) leg (p=.031) at 12 months.
    UNASSIGNED: The utility of the NASS nomenclature system in predicting postoperative outcomes after microdiscectomy has yet to be studied. We showed that sequestration status and disc area are both reliable and able to predict the odds of achieving MCID in certain clinical outcomes at 3 months and 12 months after surgery. Hence, preoperative imaging analysis of lumbar disc herniations may be useful in accurately setting patient expectations.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号