A retrospective case series of patients who have undergone coeliac plexus blocks for the purpose of alleviating pain due to intra-abdominal malignancy

被引:3
|
作者
Dumitrescu, Alix [1 ]
Aggarwal, Arun [1 ,2 ]
Chye, Richard [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Royal Prince Alfred Hosp, Camperdown, NSW, Australia
[2] Univ Sydney, Cent Clin Sch, Camperdown, NSW, Australia
[3] St Vincents Hosp, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia
[4] Univ Notre Dame Australia, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia
关键词
celiac plexus; coeliac plexus; pain management; palliative care; pancreatic neoplasms; UNRESECTABLE PANCREATIC-CANCER; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; NERVE BLOCK; NEUROLYSIS; COMPLICATIONS; MANAGEMENT; SURVIVAL; TRIAL;
D O I
10.1002/cnr2.1265
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background Coeliac plexus block (CPB) is an interventional pain management option for patients with pancreatic or other upper abdominal malignancy. Aims To assess the safety, utilization, and outcomes of CPBs in the local context. Methods and Results We conducted a retrospective case series of all patients with cancer who underwent CPB at 4 Sydney teaching hospitals from March 2010 to February 2016. We recorded baseline demographic data, details of the injectate, procedural approach and survival, as well as pain scores and analgesic use at 4 time points of interest. Thirty-nine procedures were performed during the study period. Twenty-four were performed endoscopically, 14 were performed via a bilateral percutaneous posterior approach by Pain Specialists or Radiologists and 1 was performed intraoperatively by a Surgeon. Patients had experienced pain for a mean of 17 weeks prior to CPB. Prior to CPB, the mean pain score was 8.8 out of 10. The mean pain score was reduced at 48 hours, 2 weeks, and 4 weeks following CPB (P< .01). The mean oral morphine equivalent daily dose prior to CPB was 362 mg which was reduced at 48 hours and 2 weeks but increased at the 4 weeks following CPB. One patient developed a bacteremia but otherwise no complications were observed. Conclusion CPB is performed by a number of approaches and is well tolerated. The approach selected appears to depend on patient anatomy, preference, and availability of local expertise. Local clinicians could consider CPB earlier in the management of malignant epigastric pain.
引用
收藏
页数:5
相关论文
共 5 条
  • [1] CT-Guided Coeliac Plexus Neurolysis in Patients with Intra-Abdominal Malignancy: A Retrospective Evaluation of 52 Palliative In-Patients
    Neuwersch-Sommeregger, Stefan
    Koestenberger, Markus
    Stettner, Haro
    Pipam, Wofgang
    Breschan, Christian
    Feigl, Georg
    Likar, Rudolf
    Egger, Markus
    PAIN AND THERAPY, 2021, 10 (02) : 1593 - 1603
  • [2] Computed Tomography-Guided Coeliac Plexus Neurolysis in Palliative in-Patients with Intra-Abdominal Malignancy: Retrospective Evaluation of Neurolytic Solution Spread as a Predictive Factor
    Neuwersch-Sommeregger, Stefan
    Koestenberger, Markus
    Stettner, Haro
    Pipam, Wofgang
    Breschan, Christian
    Egger, Markus
    Kraschl, Jakob
    Furstner, Matthias
    Likar, Rudolf
    Feigl, Georg
    PAIN AND THERAPY, 2022, 11 (04) : 1229 - 1243
  • [3] Survival rate and perioperative data of patients who have undergone hemipelvectomy: a retrospective case series
    Haack Couto, Alfredo Guilherme
    Araujo, Bruno
    Torres de Vasconcelos, Roberto Andre
    Renni, Marcos Jose
    Da Fonseca, Clovis Orlando
    Cavalcanti, Ismar Lima
    WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2016, 14
  • [4] Survival rate and perioperative data of patients who have undergone hemipelvectomy: a retrospective case series
    Alfredo Guilherme Haack Couto
    Bruno Araújo
    Roberto André Torres de Vasconcelos
    Marcos José Renni
    Clóvis Orlando Da Fonseca
    Ismar Lima Cavalcanti
    World Journal of Surgical Oncology, 14
  • [5] Low Volume Neurolytic Retrocrural Celiac Plexus Block for Visceral Cancer Pain: Retrospective Review of 507 Patients with Severe Malignancy Related Pain Due to Primary Abdominal Cancer or Metastatic Disease
    Rahman, Abed
    Rahman, Raed
    Macrinici, George
    Li, Sam
    PAIN PHYSICIAN, 2018, 21 (05) : 497 - 504