The aim of this prospective, randomized, double-blinded study was to evaluate the effect of pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) in comparison with conventional radiofrequency (CRF) in the treatment of idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia. A total of 40 patients with idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia were included. The 20 patients in each group were randomly assigned to one of the two treatment groups. Each patient in the Group 1 was treated with CRF, whereas each patient in the Group 2 was treated by PRF. Evaluation parameters were: pain intensity using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), patient satisfaction using a Patient Satisfaction Scale (PSS), additional pharmacological treatment, side effects, and complications related to the technique. The VAS scores decreased significantly (p<0.001) and PSS improved significantly after the procedure in Group 1. The VAS score decreased in only 2 of 20 patients from the PRF group (Group 2) and pain recurrence occurred 3 months after the procedure. At the end of 3 months, we decided to perform CRF in Group 2, because all patients in this group still had intractable pain. After the CRF treatment, the median VAS score decreased (p<0.001) and PSS improved (p<0.001) significantly. In conclusion, the results of our study demonstrate that unlike CRF, PRF is not an effective method of pain treatment for idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia.
The results of the present study demonstrate that pre-emptive epidural ketamine is effective in reducing intra- and postoperative analgesic requirements, hyperalgesia and touch allodynia.
Palliative treatment, pain therapy and quality of life (QOL) are very important in pancreatic cancer patients. We evaluated the pain relieving efficacy, side effects and effects on QOL of neurolytic coeliac plexus blockade (NCPB) and splanchnic nerves neurolytic blockade (SNB) in body and tail located pancreatic cancer. The study protocol was approved by the local ethics committee. Patients were randomly divided into two groups. Coeliac group; GC, N = 19 were treated with coeliac plexus blockade, whereas the patients in splanchnic group; GS, N = 20 were treated with bilateral splanchnic nerve blockade. The VAS values, opioid consumption and QOL (Patient satisfaction scale=PSS, performance status scale=PS) were evaluated prior to the procedure and at 2 weeks intervals after the procedure with the survival rates. The demographic features were found to be similar. The VAS differences (difference of every control's value with baseline value) in GS were significantly higher than the VAS differences in GC on every control meaning that VAS values in GS decreased more than the VAS values in GC. GS patients were found to decrease the opioid consumption significantly more than GC till the 6th control. GS patients had significant improvement in PS values at the first control. The mean survival rate was found to be significantly lower in GC. Two patients had severe pain during injection in GC and 5 patients had intractable diarrhoea in GC. Comparing the ease, pain relieving efficacy, QOL-effects of the methods, splanchnic nerve blocks may be an alternative to coeliac plexus blockade in patients with advanced body and tail located pancreatic cancer.
s, 5th EFIC Congress, Free Presentations department. While the therapy was going on, her pain scores (VAS) were decreased below 3 and further disappeared in one month. Conclusion: Brucellosis may present as a nonspecific illness with fever, arthralgia and myalgia like influenza. Despite the lack of diagnostic criteria, brucellosis should be kept in mind in patients complaining about low back pain especially in endemic areas. Other complaints and history of the patient like lumbar trauma may confuse us.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.