摘要
目的观察颧弓上侧入路穿刺行蝶腭神经节阻滞治疗偏头痛的疗效。方法选择偏头痛患者80例，随机分为神经阻滞组（n=41）和药物组（n=39），神经阻滞组行经颧弓上侧入路蝶腭神经节阻滞，每周1次，3—4次为1疗程；药物组单纯口服药物，天麻素胶囊100mg，3次心草乌甲素0．4mg，3次似、醋氯芬酸钠缓释片0．2g，1次，d，疗程为3—4周。观察患者治疗前与治疗后15d及3、6个月时的VAS评分，评价疗效。结果与治疗前比较，治疗后15d与3、6个月时，两组患者VAS均下降（P〈0．05），与药物组比较，神经阻滞组VAS下降更为明显（P〈0．05）。治疗后上述不同时点神经阻滞组优良率分别为92．7％（38／41例）、90．2％（37／41例）、85．3％（36／41例）均高于药物组61．5％（24／39例）、56．4％（22／39例）、59．0％（23／39例）（P〈0．05）。结论经颧弓上侧入路穿刺行蝶腭神经节阻滞治疗偏头痛疗效显著。
Objective To observe the efficacy of sphenopalatine ganglion block via the suprazygomatic arch approach in the treatment of migraine. Methods Eighty patients with migraine were divided into nerve block group （n=gl） and oral drug group （n=39）. The patients in nerve block group were treated by sphenopalatine ganglion block via the suprazygomatic arch approach, and in oral drug group with oral gastrodin cap- sules （100 rag, 3 times/d） , bulleyaconitine A （0.4 mg, 3 times/d） and aceclofenac sustained release tablet （0.2 g, 1 time/d）. VAS before the treatment and at 15 d, 3 months and 6 months after the treatment was observed. The efficacy of different time points was evaluated respectively after the treatment. Results Compared with pretreatment, VAS in all patients at different time points decreased significantly after the treatment （P〈O.05）. Compared with oral drug group, VAS in nerve block group decreased significantly （P〈0.05）. The excellent and good rate in nerve block group 92.7% （38/41 cases）, 90.2% （37/dlcases）, 85.3% （36/41 cases） were significantly higher than those in oral drug group 61.5 % （24/39 cases）, 56.4% （22/39cases）, 59.0% （23/39 cases）after the treatment at different time points mentioned above. Conclusion Sphenopalatine ganglion block via suprazy- gomatic arch approach is an effective method to treat the migraine.
出处
《实用疼痛学杂志》
2017年第3期172-175,共4页
Pain Clinic Journal
关键词
偏头痛
颧弓上侧入路
蝶腭神经节
神经传导阻滞
Migraine
Suprazygomatic arch incision
Sphenopalatine ganglia
Nerve block
