An Open Randomized Comparison of Clinical Effectiveness of Protocol-Driven Opioid Analgesia, Celiac Plexus Block or Thoracoscopic Splanchnicectomy for Pain Management in Patients with Pancreatic and Other Abdominal MalignanciesJohnson C.D.a · Berry D.P.b · Harris S.c · Pickering R.M.c · Davis C.a · George S.c · Imrie C.W.d · Neoptolemos J.P.e · Sutton R.e
aSouthampton General Hospital, Southampton, bLeicester General Hospital, Leicester, cUniversity of Southampton, Southampton, dGlasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, and eRoyal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, UK
Do you have an account?
- Rent for 48h to view
- Buy Cloud Access for unlimited viewing via different devices
- Synchronizing in the ReadCube Cloud
- Printing and saving restrictions apply
Rental: USD 8.50
Cloud: USD 20.00
Article / Publication Details
In inoperable malignancy, pain relief with opioids is often inadequate. Nerve block procedures may improve symptom control. Our aim was to assess celiac plexus block (CPB) and thoracoscopic splanchnicectomy (TS) in patients receiving appropriate medical management (MM). Methods: Patients with confirmed irresectable malignancy of the pancreas or upper abdominal viscera who required opioid analgesia were randomized to MM alone, MM+CPB, or MM+TS. Randomization was stratified by treatment centre, tumour type and previous opioid medication. The primary endpoint was pain relief at 2 months. Results: 65 patients (58 pancreas cancer) were randomized, 18 withdrew or died within 2 months. Effective pain relief was achieved in only one third of subjects at 2 weeks, and just under half at 2 months (MM: 6/19 and 5/12 evaluable patients; CPB: 5/14 and 5/9; TS 4/14 and 4/11). There were no significant differences between the groups in pain scores or opioid consumption, and there was no correlation between continued use of opioids and effective pain relief. Discussion: Previous randomized studies have shown small differences in pain scores, but no difference in opioid consumption and quality of life. The absence of any benefit from interventions in the present study questions their value.
© 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel and IAP
Article / Publication Details
Copyright / Drug Dosage / DisclaimerCopyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.