Ekhator Chukwuyem, Urbi Alyssa, Nduma Basil N, Ambe Solomon, Fonkem Ekokobe
Neuro-Oncology, New York Institute of Technology, College of Osteopathic Medicine, Old Westbury, USA.
Neuro-Oncology, Brandeis University, Boston, USA.
Cureus. 2023 Feb 13;15(2):e34932. doi: 10.7759/cureus.34932. eCollection 2023 Feb.
Dysfunction of the cervical spine and its anatomical features, mostly innervated by the C1, C2, and C3 spinal nerves, can result in a secondary headache known as cervicogenic headache (CHA), mainly characterized by unilateral pain. The usefulness of pharmaceutical medications and physical therapy is currently the subject of scant literature. Interventional pain management techniques can be applied when conservative treatment is unsuccessful. This study looks at radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and epidural steroid injection (ESI) to identify their safety and efficacy in managing patients with cervicogenic headaches and neck pain. Three databases - PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL Library, and Embase were searched, and 110 studies were identified. Nine screening processes were included for review and meta-analysis. Statistical evaluation was conducted through STATA version 17 (College Station, TX: StataCorp LLC) and effect measures were reported through random effects model risk ratios. The main subject of focus included three following outcomes: incidences of pain relief, degree and duration of pain, and incidences of adverse effects. The findings showed both interventions relieved pain by a factor of >50%, demonstrating a relative effects risk ratio of 1.45 (-0.50, 3.39) for RFA: pain relief, 84.76 (82.82, 86.69) RFA: adverse effects, and 19.46 (18.80, 20.11) ESI: pain relief at 95% confidence interval. The efficacy of RFA and ESI differ. Both interventions are effective in the reduction of cervicogenic headache pain intensity. However, their complication rates and pain duration are considerably different. With ESI, the headaches can still recur weekly, demanding the use of oral analgesics to deal with them. On the other hand, RFA has a low complication rate. Improving guidance from imaging technologies, RFA has the potential to be the most effective interventional treatment.
颈椎功能障碍及其解剖学特征主要由颈1、颈2和颈3脊神经支配,可导致一种继发性头痛,称为颈源性头痛(CHA),主要特征为单侧疼痛。目前,药物治疗和物理治疗的有效性在文献中较少提及。当保守治疗无效时,可采用介入性疼痛管理技术。本研究观察了射频消融(RFA)和硬膜外类固醇注射(ESI),以确定它们在治疗颈源性头痛和颈部疼痛患者中的安全性和有效性。检索了三个数据库——PubMed、Cochrane中央图书馆和Embase,共识别出110项研究。纳入了九个筛选过程进行综述和荟萃分析。通过STATA 17版本(德克萨斯州大学站:StataCorp有限责任公司)进行统计评估,并通过随机效应模型风险比报告效应量。主要关注的主题包括以下三个结果:疼痛缓解发生率、疼痛程度和持续时间以及不良反应发生率。研究结果表明,两种干预措施均使疼痛缓解率超过50%,RFA的相对效应风险比为1.45(-0.50,3.39):疼痛缓解,RFA:不良反应为84.76(82.82,86.69),ESI:95%置信区间的疼痛缓解为19.46(18.80,20.11)。RFA和ESI的疗效不同。两种干预措施均能有效降低颈源性头痛的疼痛强度。然而,它们的并发症发生率和疼痛持续时间有很大差异。采用ESI时,头痛仍可能每周复发,需要使用口服镇痛药来处理。另一方面,RFA的并发症发生率较低。随着成像技术引导的改进,RFA有可能成为最有效的介入治疗方法。