Clinical Study Of Pulsed Radiofrequency In The Treatment Of Post-herpetic Neuralgia

Objective: In order to explore the clinical efficacy of pulsed radiofrequency with new parameters in the treatment of post-herpetic neuralgia,the efficacy of pulsed radiofrequency and thoracic paraspinal nerve block under the guidance of B-ultrasound in the treatment of post-herpetic neuralgia was compared.and to explore the clinical applicability of the two,in order to provide a new idea for the treatment of post-herpetic neuralgia.Methods: Sixty patients with thoracic post-herpetic neuralgia were randomly divided into treatment group(n = 30)and control group(n = 30).The treatment group adopted pulsed radiofrequency with new parameters: voltage90V;time 600 s,two cycles;temperature 42 ℃;frequency 2Hz;pulse width20 ms.The control group was treated with thoracic paraspinal nerve block under the guidance of ultrasound,and the two groups identified the most obvious pain segment and the upper and lower segment as the responsible segment according to the most obvious pain area in both groups.The general data of the two groups before treatment,such as sex,age and course of disease,the NRS score before treatment and 1 week,4 weeks,12 weeks and 24 weeks after treatment were recorded respectively.The daily times of explosive pain in the two groups before treatment and 4 weeks,12 weeks and 24 weeks after treatment were recorded,and the comfort and adverse reactions of the two groups were investigated.Results: There was no significant difference in the general data,NRS score and the number of daily outbreaks of pain before treatment between the treatment group and the control group.The NRS score and the number of daily outbreaks of pain in the two groups were lower than those before treatment,and there were significant differences between the two groups(P < 0.05).In the statistics of NRS score and the number of daily outbreaks of pain,the values in the treatment group were lower than those in the control group at each time period after treatment,and there was significant difference between the two groups(P < 0.05).There was significant difference in the pain improvement rate between the test group and the control group(P < 0.05),and there was no significant difference in the pain improvement rate between the test group and the control group before and after treatment(P > 0.05).There was significant difference in the improvement rate of pain between the treatment group and the control group before and after treatment(P < 0.05).There was a significant difference in the improvement rate of pain between the treatment group and the control group before and after treatment(P < 0.05).The comfort of patients in the test group was higher than that in the control group,and there was significant difference between the two groups(P < 0.05).There were no postoperative complications such as infection in both groups.Conclusions:(1)Both groups can effectively relieve PHN,and the treatment group is better than the control group.(2)Compared with the control group,the experimental group had fewer times of daily pain outbreak.(3)The treatment group and the control group had high safety in the treatment of PHN,and no related complications occurred.(4)The treatment group has more clinical advantages than the control group.