Efficacy and Safety of Celiac Plexus Neurolysis in the Treatment of Chronic Pain Secondary to Oncological Pathology of the Upper Hemiabdomen: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

IF 1.1 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Gloria Melissa Pacheco-Feijoó, Jose Percy Amado-Tineo, Ricardo Plancarte-Sánchez, Carlos Contreras Valdivia, José M. López-Millán
{"title":"Efficacy and Safety of Celiac Plexus Neurolysis in the Treatment of Chronic Pain Secondary to Oncological Pathology of the Upper Hemiabdomen: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis","authors":"Gloria Melissa Pacheco-Feijoó, Jose Percy Amado-Tineo, Ricardo Plancarte-Sánchez, Carlos Contreras Valdivia, José M. López-Millán","doi":"10.25259/ijpc_203_2022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: The management of chronic pain among patients with abdominal cancer is complex; against that, the neurolysis of the celiac plexus (CPN) is the best technique at the moment t o determine the efficacy and safety in the treatment of chronic pain secondary to oncological pathology of the upper abdomen. Material and Methods: This was a systematic review of controlled clinical trials between 2000 and 2021, in the sources MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Three independent evaluators analysed the results of the bibliographical research. The quality of the studies was assessed with the Jadad scale and the mean difference (95% confidence interval) and heterogeneity of the studies (I2) were calculated with Review Manager 5.3. Results: Seven hundred and forty-four publications were identified, including 13 studies in the qualitative synthesis and three studies in the quantitative synthesis. No difference was found in the decrease in pain intensity between 1 and 12 weeks after the intervention, comparing the experimental group with the control ( P > 0.05). The adverse effects related to neurolysis were not serious and transitory, mentioning the most frequent adverse effects and reporting a percentage between 21% and 67% (with 17% for echoendoscopic neurolysis and 49% for percutaneous neurolysis). Conclusion: Celiac plexus neurolysis for the treatment of severe chronic pain secondary to oncological pathology in the upper hemiabdomen produces similar pain relief as conventional pharmacological analgesic treatment. It is a safe analgesic technique since the complications are mild and transitory.","PeriodicalId":13319,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Palliative Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Palliative Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25259/ijpc_203_2022","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: The management of chronic pain among patients with abdominal cancer is complex; against that, the neurolysis of the celiac plexus (CPN) is the best technique at the moment t o determine the efficacy and safety in the treatment of chronic pain secondary to oncological pathology of the upper abdomen. Material and Methods: This was a systematic review of controlled clinical trials between 2000 and 2021, in the sources MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Three independent evaluators analysed the results of the bibliographical research. The quality of the studies was assessed with the Jadad scale and the mean difference (95% confidence interval) and heterogeneity of the studies (I2) were calculated with Review Manager 5.3. Results: Seven hundred and forty-four publications were identified, including 13 studies in the qualitative synthesis and three studies in the quantitative synthesis. No difference was found in the decrease in pain intensity between 1 and 12 weeks after the intervention, comparing the experimental group with the control ( P > 0.05). The adverse effects related to neurolysis were not serious and transitory, mentioning the most frequent adverse effects and reporting a percentage between 21% and 67% (with 17% for echoendoscopic neurolysis and 49% for percutaneous neurolysis). Conclusion: Celiac plexus neurolysis for the treatment of severe chronic pain secondary to oncological pathology in the upper hemiabdomen produces similar pain relief as conventional pharmacological analgesic treatment. It is a safe analgesic technique since the complications are mild and transitory.
腹腔丛神经松解术治疗上腹肿瘤病理继发慢性疼痛的疗效和安全性:系统综述和荟萃分析
目的:腹部肿瘤患者慢性疼痛的处理是复杂的;因此,腹腔神经丛松解术(CPN)是目前确定治疗上腹部肿瘤病理继发慢性疼痛的疗效和安全性的最佳技术。材料和方法:这是一项2000年至2021年间对照临床试验的系统综述,来源为MEDLINE/PubMed、Cochrane、Scopus、Web of Science和Google Scholar。三位独立评估人员分析了书目研究的结果。采用Jadad量表评估研究质量,使用Review Manager 5.3计算研究的平均差值(95%置信区间)和异质性(I2)。结果:共收录文献744篇,其中定性综合文献13篇,定量综合文献3篇。干预后1周至12周,实验组与对照组疼痛强度的降低无明显差异(P >0.05)。与神经松解术相关的不良反应并不严重,也不是短暂的,最常见的不良反应发生率在21%到67%之间(超声内镜下神经松解术为17%,经皮神经松解术为49%)。结论:腹腔神经丛松解术治疗上半腹部肿瘤病理继发的严重慢性疼痛,其镇痛效果与常规药物镇痛相似。这是一种安全的镇痛技术,因为并发症轻微且短暂。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Indian Journal of Palliative Care
Indian Journal of Palliative Care HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
57
期刊介绍: Welcome to the website of the Indian Journal of Palliative Care. You have free full text access to recent issues of the journal. The links connect you to •guidelines and systematic reviews in palliative care and oncology •a directory of palliative care programmes in India and IAPC membership •Palliative Care Formulary, book reviews and other educational material •guidance on statistical tests and medical writing.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信