MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4406439561 · doi:10.36076/ppj.2024.7.e395

Computed Tomography-Guided Radiofrequency Ablation for Glossopharyngeal Neuralgia: Comparison of Cervical Computed Tomography Angiography, Transverse Process of Atlas, and Styloid Process Localization to Styloid Process Localization Alone

2024· article· en· W4406439561 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevuePain Physician · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueOropharyngeal Anatomy and Pathologies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineRadiologyComputed tomography angiographyTomographyProcess (computing)Atlas (anatomy)Computed tomographyOdontoid processAnatomyCervical spineSurgery

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Glossopharyngeal neuralgia (GPN) is a condition that causes simultaneous headache and facial pain. The treatment for GPN is similar to the treatment for trigeminal neuralgia. Craniotomy microvascular decompression (MVD) or radiofrequency (RF) therapy is needed if conservative treatment with oral drugs fails. Therefore, the choice of radiofrequency therapy target is essential when treating GPN. However, finding the glossopharyngeal nerve simply by styloid process positioning is challenging. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, clinical research study. SETTING: Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medical Center, Jiaxing, China. OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical effects of computed tomography (CT)-guided RF treatments on GPN when the triple localization of cervical CT, the transverse process of the atlas, and the styloid process is used to those achieved when the treatments are guided by the styloid process alone. METHODS: From August 2016 to December 2019, 19 cases of GPN neuralgia were treated by radiofrequency under the guidance of CT guided by the styloid process only. (These patients comprised the single localization (SL) of styloid process group, in whom the target of the RF treatments was the posterior medial side of half of the styloid process). From January 2020 to December 2022, 16 cases of GPN were treated by RF under the guidance of CT with cervical CTA (CT angiography), the transverse process of the atlas, and the styloid process. (These patients were placed in the TL group, in whom the target of RF therapy was the gap between the internal carotid artery and the internal jugular vein behind the horizontal styloid process at the lower edge of the transverse process of the atlas). Two percent lidocaine was injected subcutaneously at the needle insertion site, and a stylet with a 21-gauge blunt RF needle (model: 240100, manufacturer: Englander Medical Technology Co., Ltd.) was slowly advanced toward the target. After that, an RF probe was introduced, then low (2 Hz)- and high (50 Hz)-frequency currents of the RF instrument (model: PMG-230, Canada Baylis company) were applied to stimulate. A successful test was defined as a 0.5-1.0 mA current stimulation that could induce the original pain area in the pharynx, the inner ear, or both, without any abnormal irritation of the vagus or accessory nerves. If the first test was unsuccessful, then in the SL group, the needle tip’s position was adjusted to the distal end of the styloid process, and in the triple localization (TL) group, the needle tip depth’s was fine-tuned. A continuous RF treatment was given after a successful test. The RF temperature was 95ºC for 180 seconds. The time that the first puncture reached the target, the puncture paths, the success rate of the first test, the time that the glossopharyngeal nerve was found, the frequency of adjustments to the position of the RF needle, the incidence of intraoperative and postoperative complications, and the therapeutic effects were recorded. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in demographic data such as age, medical history, lateral classification, and pain score between the groups, but the TL group had a higher proportion of women than did the SL group. All patients’ puncture targets were identified according to the designed puncture path before the operation. There was no difference between the 2 groups in the time of the first puncture to the target (5.05 ± 1.22 vs. 5.82 ± 1.51, P = 0.18), and the designed puncture depth (3.65 ± 0.39 vs. 4.04 ± 0.44). The difference in puncture angles (13.48 ± 3.56 vs. 17.84 ± 3.98, P < 0.01) was statistically significant, and in 8 cases in the SL group, the glossopharyngeal nerve could not be found after 60 minutes of testing, so the RF treatment was terminated. Meanwhile, this problem occurred in only 2 cases in the TL group. There were 3 cervical hematoma cases and 2 cases of transient hoarseness and cough in the SL group, whereas the TL group had, respectively, 0 and one cases of those issues. There was no death in either group. LIMITATIONS: More clinical data should be collected in future studies. CONCLUSION: When using RF as a treatment for GPN, the glossopharyngeal nerve is easier to find by using the triple positioning of the cervical CTA, the transverse process of the atlas and the styloid process as the target to determine the anterior medial edge of the internal carotid artery behind the styloid process at the level of the lower edge of the atlas transverse process. The glossopharyngeal nerve is more difficult to locate when only the posterior medial edge of the styloid process is targeted. The single-time effective rate of 180 seconds of RF ablation at 90ºC for GPN can reach 87.5% (14/16), suggesting the treatment’s potential for clinical application. KEY WORDS: Glossopharyngeal neuralgia, radiofrequency ablation, CT-guided, styloid process, atlas transverse process, cervical CTA

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Simulation ou modélisation · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,702
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,004
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,018
Tête enseignante GPT0,306
Écart entre enseignants0,289 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle