Effect of plasma radiofrequency therapy on cervical motion and inflammatory factors in patients with cervicogenic headache

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.2096-0263.2024.01.006

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective

To investigate the effect of plasma radiofrequency therapy on cervical motion and inflammatory factors in patients with cervicogenic headache.

Methods

83 patients with cervicogenic headache in our hospital from January 2021 to June 2022 divided into observation group (42 cases) and control group (41 cases). The control group took ibuprofen sustained-release capsule and flunarizine hydrochloride capsule orally, and the observation group took plasma radiofrequency therapy basis control group. Two groups were evaluated after 4 weeks of treatment. The therapeutic effects of the two groups were compared, and the scores of the concise McGill pain scale, the range of cervical motion, inflammatory factors and the changes of vertebral artery hemodynamics before and after treatment were compared.

Results

The observation group total effective rate of patients with cervical headache (90.48%) was higher than control group (73.17%) (P<0.05). After treatment, the observation group PPI (1.26±0.32), VAS (2.46±0.56), and PRI (2.27±0.46) scores of patients with cervical headache were lower than control group (2.07±0.51), (3.71±0.69), and (3.18±0.57) (P<0.05). After treatment, the observation group neck flexion (37.86±4.61)°, extension (39.74±4.58)°, left rotation (50.92±6.89)°, and right rotation (51.27±5.58)° were higher than control group (31.06±5.45)°, (30.68±5.46)°, (41.34±7.74)°, and (42.08±6.47)°(P<0.05). After treatment, the observation group serum IL-1β (0.25±0.08) pg/ml, IL-6 (43.24±9.87) pg/ml, and TNF-α (10.83±3.46) ng/ml of patients with cervical headache was lower than control group (0.57±0.17) pg/ml, (67.48±14.35) pg/ml, and (18.98±5.14) ng/ml (P<0.05). After treatment, the observation group Vd (29.48±3.46) cm/s, Vm (32.76±3.46) cm/s, and Vp (59.84±5.78) cm/s of patients with cervical headache were lower than control group (33.05±2.58) cm/s, (37.48±4.05) cm/s, and (64.52±5.16) cm/s (P<0.05).

Conclusions

Plasma radiofrequency therapy has a good effect on patients with cervicogenic headache. It can improve the range of motion of cervical vertebra and reduce the inflammatory reaction of patients.

Key words: Plasma radiofrequency therapy, Cervical headache, Cervical spine range of motion, Inflammatory factor

Zuyao Liu, Xiubo Ji, Deng Yang. Effect of plasma radiofrequency therapy on cervical motion and inflammatory factors in patients with cervicogenic headache[J]. Chinese Journal of Geriatric Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation(Electronic Edition), 2024, 10(01): 33-38.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://zhlngkykfdzzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/10.3877/cma.j.issn.2096-0263.2024.01.006

https://zhlngkykfdzzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/Y2024/V10/I01/33

Figures/Tables 6

References 19

1	Sedlackova Z, Vita M, Herman J, et al. Elasticity of neck muscles in cervicogenic headache [J]. Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ Palacky Olomouc Czech Repub, 2022, 166(3): 328-333.
2	Lerner-Lentz A, O'Halloran B, Donaldson M, et al. Pragmatic application of manipulation versus mobilization to the upper segments of the cervical spine plus exercise for treatment of cervicogenic headache: a randomized clinical trial [J]. J Man Manip Ther, 2021, 29(5): 267-275.
3	Satpute K, Bedekar N, Hall T. Headache symptom modification: the relevance of appropriate manual therapy assessment and management of a patient with features of migraine and cervicogenic headache - a case report [J]. J Man Manip Ther, 2020, 28(3): 181-188.
4	Hu JQ, Zhang J, Ru B, et al. Computed tomography-guided radiofrequency ablation of cervical intervertebral discs for the treatment of refractory cervicogenic headache: A retrospective chart review [J]. Headache, 2022, 62(7): 839-847.
5	Mao LC, Dumkrieger G, Ku D, et al. Developing multivariable models for predicting headache improvement in patients with acute post-traumatic headache attributed to mild traumatic brain injury: A preliminary study [J]. Headache, 2023, 63(1): 136-145.
6	吕春子,朱丽瑜,陈壮容,等. SF-36评分在颈源性头痛低温等离子消融术后患者生活质量评价中的应用[J].中华神经医学杂志, 2019, 18(8): 824-827.
7	Anon. Headache classification committee of the international headache society (IHS) the international classification of headache disorders, 3rd edition [J]. Cephalalgia, 2018, 38(1): 1-211.
8	Svensson J, Hermansen A, Wibault J, et al. Neck-Related headache in patients with cervical disc disease after surgery and physiotherapy: a 1-Year follow-up of a prospective randomized study [J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2020, 45(14): 952-959.
9	Govind J, Bogduk N. Sources of cervicogenic headache among the upper cervical synovial joints [J]. Pain Med, 2022, 23(6): 1059-1065.
10	Thind H, Ramanathan D, Ebinu J, et al. Headache relief is maintained 7 years after anterior cervical spine surgery: post Hoc analysis from a multicenter randomized clinical trial and cervicogenic headache hypothesis [J]. Neurospine, 2020, 17(2): 365-373.
11	刘娜,吴大胜.多靶点脉冲射频治疗颈源性头痛的临床疗效[J].中华疼痛学杂志, 2021, 17(6): 590-594.
12	Chong CD, Nikolova S, Dumkrieger G, et al. Thalamic subfield Iron accumulation after acute mild traumatic brain injury as a marker of future post-traumatic headache intensity [J]. Headache, 2023, 63(1): 156-164.
13	Mingels S, Granitzer M. Habitual cervical posture in women with episodic cervicogenic headache versus asymptomatic controls [J]. J Manipulative Physiol Ther, 2020, 43(2): 171-178.
14	张婷,游菲,万文俊,等. Mulligan手法联合人迎穴改良针刺法治疗颈源性头痛的疗效观察[J].中华物理医学与康复杂志, 2017, 39(8): 619-622.
15	智兆军,吴启龙,杜敏.龙氏正骨手法联合高压氧治疗颈源性头痛的疗效观察[J].中华航海医学与高气压医学杂志, 2020, 27(1): 87-90.
16	李富波,龚格格.臭氧注射对颈2背根神经节脉冲射频治疗颈源性头痛患者疗效的优化效果[J].中华疼痛学杂志, 2022, 18(5): 636-642.
17	闫栋,吴松斌,熊东林,等.比较超声引导下颈半棘肌针刀松解术及脉冲射频术治疗颈源性头痛的近期疗效[J].中华疼痛学杂志, 2021, 17(6): 595-601.
18	李少军,冯丹,袁峰,等.颈2背根神经节脉冲射频及神经阻滞术治疗颈源性头痛的疗效和影响因素分析[J].中华保健医学杂志, 2019, 21(6): 521-524.
19	郭玉娜,梁惠,韩雨洁,等.低温等离子消融术与脉冲射频治疗颈源性头痛的疗效及安全性分析[J].中华医学杂志, 2023, 103(7): 488-493.

组别	例数	显效	有效	无效	总有效
观察组	42	27（64.29）	11（26.19）	4（9.52）	38（90.48）^*
对照组	41	20（48.78）	10（24.39）	11（26.83）	30（73.17）
χ²值					4.196
P值					0.041

组别	例数	显效	有效	无效	总有效
观察组	42	27（64.29）	11（26.19）	4（9.52）	38（90.48）^*
对照组	41	20（48.78）	10（24.39）	11（26.83）	30（73.17）
χ²值					4.196
P值					0.041

组别	例数	PPI		VAS		PRI
组别	例数	治疗前	治疗后	治疗前	治疗后	治疗前	治疗后
观察组	42	3.17±0.54	1.26±0.32^*	6.14±0.78	2.46±0.56^*	5.43±0.84	2.27±0.46^*
对照组	41	3.20±0.67	2.07±0.51^*	6.21±0.94	3.71±0.69^*	5.36±0.97	3.18±0.57^*
t值		0.225	8.690	0.370	9.072	0.352	8.013
P值		0.823	<0.001	0.713	<0.001	0.726	<0.001

组别	例数	PPI		VAS		PRI
组别	例数	治疗前	治疗后	治疗前	治疗后	治疗前	治疗后
观察组	42	3.17±0.54	1.26±0.32^*	6.14±0.78	2.46±0.56^*	5.43±0.84	2.27±0.46^*
对照组	41	3.20±0.67	2.07±0.51^*	6.21±0.94	3.71±0.69^*	5.36±0.97	3.18±0.57^*
t值		0.225	8.690	0.370	9.072	0.352	8.013
P值		0.823	<0.001	0.713	<0.001	0.726	<0.001

组别	例数	前屈		后伸		左旋转		右旋转
组别	例数	治疗前	治疗后	治疗前	治疗后	治疗前	治疗后	治疗前	治疗后
观察组	42	22.18±3.54	37.86±4.61^*	22.54±3.27	39.74±4.58^*	32.64±4.87	50.92±6.89^*	32.18±4.52	51.27±5.58^*
对照组	41	22.31±4.67	31.06±5.45^*	22.47±3.98	30.68±5.46^*	33.15±5.57	41.34±7.74^*	31.89±5.57	42.08±6.47^*
t值		0.143	6.143	0.088	8.198	0.444	5.960	0.261	6.935
P值		0.887	<0.001	0.930	<0.001	0.658	<0.001	0.795	<0.001

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export