CLINICAL OBSERVATION ON SELECTIVE DORSAL ROOT GANGLION PULSED RADIOFREQUENCY COMBINED WITH PREGABALIN IN THE TREATMENT OF POSTHERPETICNEURALGIA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the efficacy and safety of selective dorsal root ganglion pulsed radiofrequency combined with pregabalin in treatment of postherpetic neuralgia(PHN).Methods: One hundred patients with PHN were randomly divided into two groups of 50 each according to digital table.The control group was given with pregabalin 300 mg/d;the observation group was given with pregabalin 300 mg/d combined with selective percutaneous dorsal root ganglion radiofrequency.Changes in pain degree and sleep quality were observed before treatment and at different time points after treatment(the 1st month,2nd month and 3rd month).The short-form McGill pain questionnaire(SF-MPQ) and sleep quality scores were used for evaluation of treatment effcacy,and frequencies of complications and adverse reactions were recorded.Results: The SF-MPQ of two groups decreased signifcantly at different time points after treatment compared with before treatment(P 0.01),and the sleep quality score was increased signifcantly at different time points after treatment compared with before treatment(P 0.01).The SF-MPQ of observation group decreased signifcantly after treatment compared with control group(P 0.01),the sleep quality of observation group increased signifcantly after treatment compared with control group(P 0.01).No neck hematoma and pneumothorax developed within 12 hours after treatment in observation group.The patients in two groups developed variable degrees of adverse reactions after oral pregabalin treatment,but were well tolerated.Conclusion: Selective percutaneous dorsal root ganglion radiofrequency combined with pregabalin can rapidly alleviate postherpetic neuralgia pain,enhance patients' quality of sleep,and has good safety,which was effective in treatment of PHN.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".