Fan Lu1, Jifu Dong1, Yuming Tang1, He Huang1, Hui Liu2, Li Song2, Kexian Zhang3. 1. Department of Anesthesiology, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, No. 55 Renmin Road South, Chengdu, 610000, Sichuan Province, People's Republic of China. 2. Department of Pain Management, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, People's Republic of China. 3. Department of Anesthesiology, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, No. 55 Renmin Road South, Chengdu, 610000, Sichuan Province, People's Republic of China. zhangkx3@sina.com.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided celiac plexus neurolysis (EUS-CPN) by bilateral or unilateral approach is widely used in palliative abdominal pain management in pancreatic cancer patients, but the analgesic effect and relative risks of the two different puncture routes remain controversial. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the analgesic efficacy and safety of bilateral EUS-CPN compared with unilateral EUS-CPN. METHODS: An electronic database search was performed for randomized controlled trials comparing bilateral and unilateral approaches of EUS-CPN using the Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and CNKI databases. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 after screening and methodological evaluation of the selected studies. Outcomes included pain relief, treatment response, analgesic reduction, complications, and quality of life (QOL). RESULTS: Six eligible studies involving 437 patients were included. No significant difference was found in short-term pain relief [SMD = 0.31, 95% CI (- 0.20, 0.81), P = 0.23] and response to treatment [RR = 0.99, 95% CI (0.77, 1.41), P = 0.97] between the bilateral and unilateral neurolysis groups. However, only the bilateral approach was associated with a statistically significant reduction in the postoperative use of analgesics [RR = 0.66, 95% CI (0.47, 0.94), P = 0.02] compared to the unilateral approach. A descriptive analysis was performed for complications and QOL. CONCLUSION: The short-term analgesic effect and general risk of bilateral EUS-CPN are comparable with those of unilateral EUS-CPN, but our evidence supports the conclusion that the bilateral approach significantly reduces postoperative analgesic use.
CONTEXT: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided celiac plexus neurolysis (EUS-CPN) by bilateral or unilateral approach is widely used in palliative abdominal pain management in pancreatic cancerpatients, but the analgesic effect and relative risks of the two different puncture routes remain controversial. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the analgesic efficacy and safety of bilateral EUS-CPN compared with unilateral EUS-CPN. METHODS: An electronic database search was performed for randomized controlled trials comparing bilateral and unilateral approaches of EUS-CPN using the Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and CNKI databases. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 after screening and methodological evaluation of the selected studies. Outcomes included pain relief, treatment response, analgesic reduction, complications, and quality of life (QOL). RESULTS: Six eligible studies involving 437 patients were included. No significant difference was found in short-term pain relief [SMD = 0.31, 95% CI (- 0.20, 0.81), P = 0.23] and response to treatment [RR = 0.99, 95% CI (0.77, 1.41), P = 0.97] between the bilateral and unilateral neurolysis groups. However, only the bilateral approach was associated with a statistically significant reduction in the postoperative use of analgesics [RR = 0.66, 95% CI (0.47, 0.94), P = 0.02] compared to the unilateral approach. A descriptive analysis was performed for complications and QOL. CONCLUSION: The short-term analgesic effect and general risk of bilateral EUS-CPN are comparable with those of unilateral EUS-CPN, but our evidence supports the conclusion that the bilateral approach significantly reduces postoperative analgesic use.
Authors: M De Cicco; M Matovic; R Bortolussi; F Coran; D Fantin; F Fabiani; M Caserta; C Santantonio; A Fracasso Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2001-04 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Roberta De Angelis; Milena Sant; Michel P Coleman; Silvia Francisci; Paolo Baili; Daniela Pierannunzio; Annalisa Trama; Otto Visser; Hermann Brenner; Eva Ardanaz; Magdalena Bielska-Lasota; Gerda Engholm; Alice Nennecke; Sabine Siesling; Franco Berrino; Riccardo Capocaccia Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2013-12-05 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: A Carrato; A Falcone; M Ducreux; J W Valle; A Parnaby; K Djazouli; K Alnwick-Allu; A Hutchings; C Palaska; I Parthenaki Journal: J Gastrointest Cancer Date: 2015-09
Authors: Mansoor M Aman; Ammar Mahmoud; Timothy Deer; Dawood Sayed; Jonathan M Hagedorn; Shane E Brogan; Vinita Singh; Amitabh Gulati; Natalie Strand; Jacqueline Weisbein; Johnathan H Goree; Fangfang Xing; Ali Valimahomed; Daniel J Pak; Antonios El Helou; Priyanka Ghosh; Krishna Shah; Vishal Patel; Alexander Escobar; Keith Schmidt; Jay Shah; Vishal Varshney; William Rosenberg; Sanjeet Narang Journal: J Pain Res Date: 2021-07-16 Impact factor: 3.133