Comparison of outcomes of transnasal sphenopalatine ganglion and ultrasound-guided proximal greater occipital nerve blockades in chronic migraine

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorBalta, Selin
dc.contributor.authorUca, Ali Ulvi
dc.contributor.authorOdabas, Faruk Omer
dc.contributor.authorDemir, Aysegul
dc.date.accessioned2024-02-23T14:41:32Z
dc.date.available2024-02-23T14:41:32Z
dc.date.issued2023
dc.departmentNEÜen_US
dc.description.abstractBackground & Objective: A need exists for prophylactic treatment options for chronic migraine. Our aim was to evaluate and compare the effect of greater occipital nerve (GON) and transnasal sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) blockade on headache days, responder rate, attack severity, attack frequency, and medication overuse in patients with chronic migraine. Methods: This was a retrospective study. The GON blockade was performed at the proximal level under ultrasound guidance with 1.5 cc 0.5% bupivacaine, and the SPG blockade was performed transnasally with 0.5 cc 0.5% bupivacaine applied for 30 minutes with swab sticks. Patients who completed bilateral blocks applied in four weekly sessions were included in the analysis. Results: Seventy patients (GON=37, SPG=33) were included in the study. Both groups showed a significant improvement in the number of days with headache, severity of attacks, and frequency of attacks at the first-and third-month follow-up visits compared to the baseline (p<0.001). Responder rates were similar at the first-and third-month follow-up visits (r= 3.707, p=0.054; r=0.071, p=0.790, respectively). At the third-month follow-up, the prevalence of medication overuse decreased from 78% to 13% in the GON group and from 57% to 9% in the SPG group, and these differences were statistically significant (p<0.001 for both groups). No significant difference was noted in efficacy between the treatment groups (p=0.714). No significant adverse effects occurred in either group. Conclusion: Both proximal GON blockade and minimally invasive SPG blockade are effective and safe options for prophylaxis in patients with chronic migraine.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.54029/2023dpf
dc.identifier.endpage347en_US
dc.identifier.issn1823-6138
dc.identifier.issue2en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85168826373en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ4en_US
dc.identifier.startpage337en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.54029/2023dpf
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12452/16885
dc.identifier.volume28en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:001026246800001en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherAsean Neurological Assocen_US
dc.relation.ispartofNeurology Asiaen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectChronic Migraineen_US
dc.subjectGreater Occipital Nerveen_US
dc.subjectSphenopalatine Ganglionen_US
dc.subjectNerve Blockadeen_US
dc.titleComparison of outcomes of transnasal sphenopalatine ganglion and ultrasound-guided proximal greater occipital nerve blockades in chronic migraineen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu