首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Evidence-Based Spine-Care Journal >Chronic sacroiliac joint pain: fusion versus denervation as treatment options
【2h】

Chronic sacroiliac joint pain: fusion versus denervation as treatment options

机译:慢性sa关节疼痛:融合与去神经作为治疗选择

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

>Study design: Systematic review>Objective: To compare the safety and effectiveness of fusion versus denervation for chronic sacroiliac joint pain after failed conservative management.>Summary of background: Methods of confirming the sacroiliac joint as a pain source have been extensively studied and reported in the literature. After confirmation of the origin of the pain by positive local anesthetic blocks, chronic sacroiliac joint pain is usually managed with a combination of medication, physical therapies, and injections. We have chosen to compare two alternative treatments for sacroiliac pain that was refractory to conservative therapies.>Methods: A systematic review of the English-language literature was undertaken for articles published between 1970 and June 2010. Electronic databases and reference lists of key articles were searched to identify studies evaluating fusion or denervation for chronic sacroiliac joint pain after failed conservative management. Studies involving only conservative treatment or traumatic onset of injury were excluded. Two independent reviewers assessed the level of evidence quality using the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) system, and disagreements were resolved by consensus.>Results: We identified eleven articles (six fusion, five denervation) meeting our inclusion criteria. The majority of patients report satisfaction after both treatments. Both treatments reported mean improvements in pain and functional outcome. Rates of complications were higher among fusion studies (13.7%) compared to denervation studies (7.3%). Only fusion studies reported infections (5.3%). No infections were reported among denervation patients. The evidence for all findings were very low to low; therefore, the relative efficacy or safety of one treatment over another cannot be established.>Conclusions: Sacroiliac joint fusion or denervation can reduce pain for many patients. Whether a true arthrodesis of the joint is achieved by percutaneous techniques is open to question and whether denervation of the joint gives durable pain relief is not clear. Further comparative studies of these two techniques may provide the answers.
机译:>研究设计:系统评价>目的:比较保守治疗失败后慢性versus关节疼痛的融合与去神经融合术的安全性和有效性。>背景概述:确认sa关节为疼痛源的方法已得到广泛研究,并在文献中进行了报道。在通过积极的局部麻醉阻滞确认疼痛的起源后,通常通过药物,物理疗法和注射剂的组合来治疗慢性sa关节疼痛。我们选择比较保守疗法难以治愈的sa关节疼痛的两种替代疗法。>方法:对1970年至2010年6月间发表的文章进行了英语文献的系统综述。电子数据库和搜索关键文章的参考文献清单,以鉴定评估保守治疗失败后慢性fusion关节疼痛融合或去神经支配的研究。仅涉及保守治疗或创伤发作的研究被排除在外。两名独立审阅者使用建议评估,开发和评估(GRADE)系统的等级来评估证据质量水平,并通过共识解决了分歧。>结果:我们确定了11篇文章(六篇融合,五篇神经化)符合我们的纳入标准。两种治疗后大多数患者均表示满意。两种疗法均表明疼痛和功能结局均得到改善。融合研究(13.7%)比神经支配研究(7.3%)的并发症发生率更高。仅融合研究报告感染(5.3%)。去神经支配患者中没有感染的报道。所有发现的证据从低到低。因此,不能确定一种疗法相对于另一种疗法的相对疗效或安全性。>结论:关节融合术或神经支配术可以减轻许多患者的痛苦。是否通过经皮技术实现关节的真正关节固定还有待商question,关节的去神经支配是否能持久缓解疼痛尚不清楚。这两种技术的进一步比较研究可能会提供答案。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

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