Abstract
The present report is concerned with the results of bilateral percutaneous high cervical cordotomy (60 patients) compared with those of unilateral cordotomy (161 patients). The result of pain relief is classified into 4 grades based on Hitchcock's criteria; grade 1: complete pain relief, grade 2: almost complete pain relief with slight residual pain, grade 3: persisting pain, but tolerable, grade 4: persisting pain, untolerable. In cases of bilateral cordotomy (60 patients), 76% of the cases showed grade 1, 19% being grade 2, 3% being grade 3 and 2% being grade 4. On the contrary, the unilateral cordotomy (161 patients) showed less impressive results, particularly in grade 1, namely, grade 1 being 64%, grade 2 being 18%, grade 3 being 14% and grade 4 being 4%. Clinically acceptable results (grade 1 plus grade 2) were, therefore, obtained in bilateral cordotomy (95%) as compared with unilateral cordotomy (82%). The difference in pain relief between bilateral and unilateral procedure observed in the present investigation is contrary to that reported previously by others. The possible explanation for less impressive result in regard to grade 1 of unilateral cordotomy is that unilateral cordotomy was performed in this series to alleviate the major side of patient's pain, followed by latent pain on the other side postoperatively, which is not uncommon phenomenon in cancer pain. Whereas all of the bilateral cordotomies were done either for midline pain or bilateral pain, unilateral cordotomy gave satisfactory pain relief in some cases of midline pain. Midline pain, therefore, does not necessarily require bilateral cordotomies from a clinical point of view.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 143-145 |
| Number of pages | 3 |
| Journal | Acta Neurochirurgica, Supplement |
| Volume | 52 |
| Publication status | Published - 1991 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Medicine(all)
- Clinical Neurology
Cite this
Bilateral versus unilateral percutaneous high cervical cordotomy as a surgical method of pain relief. / Amano, K.; Kawamura, H.; Tanikawa, T.; Kawabatake, H.; Iseki, Hiroshi; Iwata, Y.; Taira, T.
In: Acta Neurochirurgica, Supplement, Vol. 52, 1991, p. 143-145.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Bilateral versus unilateral percutaneous high cervical cordotomy as a surgical method of pain relief.
AU - Amano, K.
AU - Kawamura, H.
AU - Tanikawa, T.
AU - Kawabatake, H.
AU - Iseki, Hiroshi
AU - Iwata, Y.
AU - Taira, T.
PY - 1991
Y1 - 1991
N2 - The present report is concerned with the results of bilateral percutaneous high cervical cordotomy (60 patients) compared with those of unilateral cordotomy (161 patients). The result of pain relief is classified into 4 grades based on Hitchcock's criteria; grade 1: complete pain relief, grade 2: almost complete pain relief with slight residual pain, grade 3: persisting pain, but tolerable, grade 4: persisting pain, untolerable. In cases of bilateral cordotomy (60 patients), 76% of the cases showed grade 1, 19% being grade 2, 3% being grade 3 and 2% being grade 4. On the contrary, the unilateral cordotomy (161 patients) showed less impressive results, particularly in grade 1, namely, grade 1 being 64%, grade 2 being 18%, grade 3 being 14% and grade 4 being 4%. Clinically acceptable results (grade 1 plus grade 2) were, therefore, obtained in bilateral cordotomy (95%) as compared with unilateral cordotomy (82%). The difference in pain relief between bilateral and unilateral procedure observed in the present investigation is contrary to that reported previously by others. The possible explanation for less impressive result in regard to grade 1 of unilateral cordotomy is that unilateral cordotomy was performed in this series to alleviate the major side of patient's pain, followed by latent pain on the other side postoperatively, which is not uncommon phenomenon in cancer pain. Whereas all of the bilateral cordotomies were done either for midline pain or bilateral pain, unilateral cordotomy gave satisfactory pain relief in some cases of midline pain. Midline pain, therefore, does not necessarily require bilateral cordotomies from a clinical point of view.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
AB - The present report is concerned with the results of bilateral percutaneous high cervical cordotomy (60 patients) compared with those of unilateral cordotomy (161 patients). The result of pain relief is classified into 4 grades based on Hitchcock's criteria; grade 1: complete pain relief, grade 2: almost complete pain relief with slight residual pain, grade 3: persisting pain, but tolerable, grade 4: persisting pain, untolerable. In cases of bilateral cordotomy (60 patients), 76% of the cases showed grade 1, 19% being grade 2, 3% being grade 3 and 2% being grade 4. On the contrary, the unilateral cordotomy (161 patients) showed less impressive results, particularly in grade 1, namely, grade 1 being 64%, grade 2 being 18%, grade 3 being 14% and grade 4 being 4%. Clinically acceptable results (grade 1 plus grade 2) were, therefore, obtained in bilateral cordotomy (95%) as compared with unilateral cordotomy (82%). The difference in pain relief between bilateral and unilateral procedure observed in the present investigation is contrary to that reported previously by others. The possible explanation for less impressive result in regard to grade 1 of unilateral cordotomy is that unilateral cordotomy was performed in this series to alleviate the major side of patient's pain, followed by latent pain on the other side postoperatively, which is not uncommon phenomenon in cancer pain. Whereas all of the bilateral cordotomies were done either for midline pain or bilateral pain, unilateral cordotomy gave satisfactory pain relief in some cases of midline pain. Midline pain, therefore, does not necessarily require bilateral cordotomies from a clinical point of view.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0026284773&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0026284773&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Article
C2 - 1792956
AN - SCOPUS:0026284773
VL - 52
SP - 143
EP - 145
JO - Acta neurochirurgica. Supplement
JF - Acta neurochirurgica. Supplement
SN - 0065-1419
ER -