星状神经节阻滞联合穴位注射治疗颈源性头痛

Treatment of Cervicogenic Headache Using Stellate Ganglion Block Combined with Acupoint Injection

目的:探讨星状神经节阻滞联合穴位注射治疗颈源性头痛的疗效。方法:选取颈源性头痛患者84例,按随机数字表分为治疗组和对照组各42例。两组均口服加巴喷丁,治疗组同时采用星状神经节阻滞联合穴位注射治疗,对照组只进行星状神经节阻滞,阻滞方法同治疗组。采用视觉模拟量表(VAS)进行疼痛程度评分和焦虑(SAS)、抑郁自评量(SDS)表进行心理指标评分。结果:治疗组患者治疗前后VAS评分分别为(8.98±0.66)、(3.13±2.50);对照组治疗前后VAS评分分别为(8.80±0.61)、(5.20±2.85),治疗组患者治疗前后SAS评分分别为(50.88±4.37)、(35.00±3.63);对照组治疗前后SAS评分分别为(47.96±7.81)、(41.99±3.71),治疗组患者治疗前后SDS评分分别为(53.32±4.69)、(35.09±3.64),对照组治疗前后SDS评分分别为(53.10±5.82)、(48.17±5.27),两组VAS、SAS、SDS评分均明显低于治疗前,治疗组评分更低(P<0.05)。治疗组患者显效34例、占80.95%;对照组患者显效24例、占57.14%。两组比较,统计学有显著性差异(P<0.05)。结论:星状神经节阻滞联合穴位注射治疗颈源性头痛,更具有良好的疗效。

Objective To study the efficiency of satellite ganglion block （SGB） combined with acupoint-in- jection for cervical headache （CEH）. Methods Eighty-four patients of CEH were randomly chosen and divid- ed into control group and therapy group evenly. Gabapentin was administered in both groups. SGB and acu- point-injection were performed in therapy group. The control group, however, was given SGB only. All patients were assessed by the ways of visual analogue scale （VAS）, self-rating anxiety scale （SAS） and self-rating depression scale（SDS）. The clinical therapy effective- ness was also evaluated before and after the treat-ment. Results The VAS scores were （8.98±0.66） and （3.13±2.50） in the therapy group before and after treat- ment, and those in the control group were （8.80±0.61） and （5.20±2.85）. The SAS scores were （50.88±4.37） and （35.00±3.63）in the therapy group before and after treatment, and those in the control group were（47.96±7.81） and （41.99±3.71）. The SDS scores were（53.32±4.69） and （35.09±3.64）in the therapy group before and after treatment, and those in the control group were （53.10±5.82） and （48.17±5.27）.VAS, SAS and SDS showed no dif- ference between two groups before treatment. The scores of all items in the therapy group were much lower than those in the control group after treatment. There was significant difference between them after treatment （P 〈 0.05）. In the therapy group, there were 34 cases showing remarkable efficacy （80.95%）. There were 24 cases showing remarkable efficacy （57.14%） in the control group. The curative effect of the therapy group was signifi- cantly better than that of the control group. Conclusion The treatment of CHE using SGB combined with acu- point-injection is more effective than the pure SGB method.