We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Review
Efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided celiac plexus block and celiac plexus neurolysis for managing abdominal pain associated with chronic pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer.
Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology 2010 Februrary
BACKGROUND/GOALS: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided celiac plexus block (CPB) and celiac plexus neurolysis (CPN) have become important interventions in the management of pain due to chronic pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer. However, only a few well-structured studies have been performed to evaluate their efficacy. Given limited data, their use remains controversial. Herein, we evaluate the efficacy of EUS-guided CPB and CPN in alleviating chronic abdominal pain due to chronic pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer respectively.
STUDY METHODS: Using Medline, Pubmed, and Embase databases from January 1966 through December 2007, a thorough search of the English literature for studies evaluating the efficacy of EUS-guided CPB and CPN for the management of chronic abdominal pain due to chronic pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer was conducted, along with a hand search of reference lists. Studies that involved less than 10 patients were excluded. Data on pain relief was extracted, pooled, and analyzed.
RESULTS: A total of 9 studies were included in the final analysis. For chronic pancreatitis, 6 relevant studies were identified, comprising a total of 221 patients. EUS-guided CPB was effective in alleviating abdominal pain in 51.46% of patients. For pancreatic cancer, 5 relevant studies were identified with a total of 119 patients. EUS-guided CPN was effective in alleviating abdominal pain in 72.54% of patients.
CONCLUSIONS: EUS-guided CPB was 51.46% effective in managing chronic abdominal pain in patients with chronic pancreatitis, but warrants improvement in patient selection and refinement of technique, whereas EUS-guided CPN was 72.54% effective in managing pain due to pancreatic cancer and is a reasonable option for patients with tolerance to narcotic analgesics.
STUDY METHODS: Using Medline, Pubmed, and Embase databases from January 1966 through December 2007, a thorough search of the English literature for studies evaluating the efficacy of EUS-guided CPB and CPN for the management of chronic abdominal pain due to chronic pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer was conducted, along with a hand search of reference lists. Studies that involved less than 10 patients were excluded. Data on pain relief was extracted, pooled, and analyzed.
RESULTS: A total of 9 studies were included in the final analysis. For chronic pancreatitis, 6 relevant studies were identified, comprising a total of 221 patients. EUS-guided CPB was effective in alleviating abdominal pain in 51.46% of patients. For pancreatic cancer, 5 relevant studies were identified with a total of 119 patients. EUS-guided CPN was effective in alleviating abdominal pain in 72.54% of patients.
CONCLUSIONS: EUS-guided CPB was 51.46% effective in managing chronic abdominal pain in patients with chronic pancreatitis, but warrants improvement in patient selection and refinement of technique, whereas EUS-guided CPN was 72.54% effective in managing pain due to pancreatic cancer and is a reasonable option for patients with tolerance to narcotic analgesics.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app