Brief review: Neuraxial analgesia in refractory malignant pain

Efficacy of epidural analgesia for intractable cancer pain: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Epidural analgesia is a common technique for managing perioperative and obstetric pain. Patients with cancer who cannot tolerate opioids or not responding to conventional treatment may benefit from epidural analgesia. Therefore, this systematic review aimed to analyze the efficacy and safety of epidural analgesia in patients with intractable cancer pain.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to identify studies on patients with cancer who received epidural analgesia. We assessed the quality of all included studies using the risk-of-bias tool or Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The primary outcome was pain relief after epidural analgesia, and the secondary outcome was quality of life, analgesic consumption, and adverse events. The studies were grouped based on the medications used for epidural analgesia. A descriptive synthesis was performed following the Synthesis Without Meta-analysis reporting guideline.

RESULTS

Our systematic review included nine randomized controlled trials (n = 340) and 15 observational studies (n = 926). Two randomized controlled trials suggested that epidural opioids were not superior to systemic opioids in relieving pain. Epidural opioids combined with local anesthetics or adjuvants, including calcitonin, clonidine, ketamine, neostigmine, methadone, and dexamethasone, offered better analgesic effects. No significant difference in pain relief between an intermittent bolus and a continuous infusion of epidural morphine was observed. Epidural opioids had more analgesic effects on nociceptive pain than neuropathic pain. The methods used to evaluate the quality of life and the corresponding results were heterogeneous among studies. Six observational studies demonstrated that some patients could have decreased opioid consumption after epidural analgesia. Adverse events, including complications and drug-related side effects, were reported in 23 studies. Five serious complications, such as epidural abscess and hematoma, required surgical management. The heterogeneity and methodological limitations of the studies hindered meta-analysis and evidence-level determination.

CONCLUSION

Coadministration of epidural opioids, local anesthetics, and adjuvants may provide better pain relief for intractable cancer pain. However, we must assess the patients to ensure that the benefits outweigh the risks before epidural analgesia. Therefore, further high-quality studies are required.

Upper thoracic spine puncture and caudal advance of an epidural catheter for adequate analgesia in a patient with breast cancer with chest and upper back pain: A case report

Patients with advanced cancer and metastasis frequently require analgesic treatments to relieve pain and maintain an acceptable quality of life. Continuous analgesic treatment with epidural drug infusion is one interventional approach to provide adequate pain relief. Most epidural analgesia procedures are performed with the catheter inserted in the lower thoracic or lumbar spine areas, which is then advanced in a cephalad direction to reach the level that requires analgesia. The present study reported on a patient with chest and upper back pain who failed oral oxycodone treatment. Epidural analgesia to target the T5 level was planned. However, a lower spinal puncture with cephalad advance of the catheter was not possible due to metastasis and compression in the T5-8 levels. Thoracic spine puncture was performed between the T1 and T2 vertebrae and the infusion catheter was advanced in a caudal direction to reach the T5 level. Successful pain relief and amelioration of clinical symptoms demonstrated that the method may be considered a feasible and safe approach to achieve adequate analgesia and improve the quality of life of patients with similar conditions.

Intrathecal drug delivery for cancer pain at the end of life: a case study

Two-thirds of patients with advanced cancer have pain and, of these, approximately 10-20% do not respond to conventional pain management approaches. This case study concerns a hospice patient who received intrathecal drug delivery for intractable cancer pain at the end of life. This involved working in partnership with a hospital-based interventional pain team. Despite side-effects and complications associated with intrathecal drug delivery and the requirement for inpatient nursing care, intrathecal drug delivery was the best option for the patient. The case identifies the importance of a patient-centred approach to decision-making, effective partnerships between hospice and acute hospital teams, and nurse education as key factors contributing to the provision of safe and effective intrathecal drug delivery.

Interventional Treatment Modalities for Chronic Abdominal and Pelvic Visceral Pain

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Chronic abdominal and pelvic visceral pain is an oftentimes difficult to treat pain condition that requires a multidisciplinary approach. This article specifically reviews the interventional treatment options for pain resulting from visceral abdominal and pelvic pain.

RECENT FINDINGS

Sympathetic nerve blocks are the main interventional option for the treatment of chronic abdominal and pelvic visceral pain. Initially, nerve blocks are performed, and subsequently, neurolytic injections (alcohol or phenol) are longer term options. This review describes different techniques for sympathetic blockade. Neuromodulation is a potential option via dorsal column stimulation or dorsal root ganglion stimulation. Finally, intrathecal drug delivery is sometimes appropriate for refractory cases. This paper will review interventional options for the treatment of chronic abdominal and pelvic visceral pain.

Pain Control with Splanchnic Neurolysis in Pancreatic Cancer Patients Unresponsive to Celiac Plexus Neurolysis

BACKGROUND/AIMS

In most instances of abdominal pain associated with pancreatic cancer, pain may become refractory to increasing doses of narcotics. Celiac plexus neurolysis represents an option; however, altered celiac plexus anatomy may render this treatment infeasible or ineffective, where splanchnic nerve neurolysis may represent another option. This study aimed to investigate the outcomes of splanchnic neurolysis in pancreatic cancer patients not responsive to celiac plexus neurolysis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Among all 84 patients who underwent celiac plexus neurolysis for pancreatic cancer pain during the study period, 34 patients did not respond and underwent splanchnic nerve neurolysis under fluoroscopic guidance and thus included in this retrospective study. Stage IV, III, and II disease was present in 38.2%, 47.1%, and 14.7% of the patients. During the study, 88.2% were receiving chemotherapy, whereas none were on radiotherapy. Data for daily narcotic dose equivalents and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores during outpatient visits at baseline, 2 weeks, 2 months, and 3 months were extracted.

RESULTS

Pain response rates were 76.5%, 84.4%, and 71.0%, at 2 weeks, 2 months, and 3 months, respectively. A significant and dramatic reduction was seen in VAS scores at 2 weeks (2.8±1.2 versus 6.3±1.1, p<0.001), and this significant decline was maintained for 3 months. Similarly, a significant and dramatic reduction was seen in daily narcotic need at 2 weeks (20.8±32.9 versus 93.4±86.2 mg, p<0.001), which was also maintained during the 3-month follow-up. The procedure was generally well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

Findings of this study suggest that splanchnic neurolysis represents a durable and effective option for pain control in pancreatic cancer patients in whom the neurolysis of the celiac plexus is ineffective. However, these conclusions refer to only preliminary single-center results in a selected patient group; thus, further large studies are warranted.

Interventional anesthesia and palliative care collaboration to manage cancer pain: a narrative review

Pain is a common symptom associated with advanced cancer. An estimated 66.4% of people with advanced cancer experience pain from their disease or treatment. Pain management is an essential component of palliative care. Opioids and adjuvant therapies are the mainstay of cancer pain management. Nevertheless, a proportion of patients may experience complex pain that is not responsive to conventional analgesia. Interventional analgesia procedures may be appropriate and necessary to manage complex, cancer-related pain. This narrative review uses a theoretical case to highlight core principles of palliative care and interventional anesthesia, and the importance of collaborative, interdisciplinary care. An overview and discussion of pragmatic considerations of peripheral nervous system interventional analgesic procedures and neuraxial analgesia infusions are provided.