隐神经射频与关节腔注射曲安奈德治疗膝骨性关节炎的效果比较

To compare the clinical effect of saphenous nerve radiofrequencyablation and intra⁃articular injection of triamcinalone in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis

目的比较隐神经射频与关节腔注射曲安奈德治疗膝骨性关节炎的临床效果。方法选择从2021年6月到2022年6月收治符合研究标准的膝骨性关节炎患者60例,并随机分为对照组和研究组,每组各30例患者。研究组运用超声引导下隐神经脉冲射频治疗,对照组运用关节腔内注射曲安奈德治疗。比较两组患者在治疗前,治疗后1周、1个月及6个月的视觉疼痛模拟评分(VAS)和WOMAC评分,并观察是否有并发症的发生。结果研究发现两组都无并发症发生。两组治疗后1周、1个月的VAS评分差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),研究组在治疗后1、6个月后的VAS评分要低于对照组。两组疗后1周、1个月及6个月的WOMAC评分差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),对照组在治疗后1个月及6个月的WOMAC评分高于研究组(P<0.05)。结论超声引导下隐神经脉冲射频可有效减轻骨性关节炎疼痛,其临床疗效优于关节腔内注射激素治疗。

Objective Comparison of saphenous nerve radiofrequency ablation and intra⁃articular injec⁃tion of triamcinolone for treatment of knee osteoarthritis.Methods From June 2021 to June 2022,60 patients with knee osteoarthritis who met relevant criteria were admitted to our hospital and randomly divided into two groups,control group and study group,with 30 patients in each group.Patients in the study group were treated with ultrasound⁃guided saphenous nerve pulse radiofrequency therapy,while patients in the control group were treated with intra⁃articular triamcinolone injection.The visual analogue scale score and WOMAC score of the two groups were compared and analyzed before treatment,1 week,1 month and 6 months after treatment,and whether there were complications between the two groups was observed.Results No complications were found in both groups.The VAS scores of patients 1 week and 1 month after treatment were statistically different(P<0.05),and the VAS scores of the study group 1 month and 6 months after treatment were lower than those of the control group.The difference in WOMAC scores of 1 week,1 month and 6 months after treatment was statistically significant between the two groups,and the WOMAC scores of 1 month and 6 months after treatment in the control group were higher than those in the study group(P<0.05).Conclusion Ultrasound⁃guided saphenous nerve pulse radiofre⁃quency can effectively relieve the pain of osteoarthritis,and its clinical efficacy is better than that of intraarticular hormone injection.