Interventional Procedures for Cancer Pain Management: When Are They Indicated?

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.

An overview of treatment strategies for cancer pain with a focus on interventional strategies and techniques

SUMMARY As the incidence of cancer increases, considerations for pain treatments become more important and varied. While traditional views on pain therapy are successful in treating the majority of cancer-related pain, a continuum has developed to include interventional strategies in addition to pharmacologic management. Further improvements in understanding anatomy in the context of imaging and pathophysiology of cancer-pain syndromes direct our current interventional pain management options. We discuss the current interventional treatment options regularly used in the cancer-pain population.

Epidural Infusion of Morphine and Levobupivacaine through a Subcutaneous Port for Cancer Pain Management

BACKGROUND

To manage intractable cancer pain, an alternative to systemic analgesics is neuraxial analgesia. In long-term treatment, intrathecal administration could provide a more satisfactory pain relief with lower doses of analgesics and fewer side-effects than that of epidural administration. However, implantable drug delivery systems using intrathecal pumps in Korea are very expensive. Considering cost-effectiveness, we performed epidural analgesia as an alternative to intrathecal analgesia.

METHODS

We retrospectively investigated the efficacy, side effects, and complications of epidural morphine and local anesthetic administration through epidural catheters connected to a subcutaneous injection port in 29 Korean terminal cancer patients. Patient demographic data, the duration of epidural administration, preoperative numerical pain rating scales (NRS), side effects and complications related to the epidural catheterization and the drugs, and the numerical pain rating scales on the 1st, 3rd, 7th and 30th postoperative days were determined from the medical records.

RESULTS

The average score for the numerical pain rating scales for the 29 patients decreased from 7 ± 1.0 at baseline to 3.6 ± 1.4 on postoperative day 1 (P < 0.001). A similar decrease in pain intensity was maintained for 30 days (P < 0.001). Nausea and vomiting were the most frequently reported side effects of the epidural analgesia and two patients (6.9%) experienced paresthesia.

CONCLUSIONS

Epidural morphine and local anesthetic infusion with a subcutaneous pump seems to have an acceptable risk-benefit ratio and allows a high degree of autonomy to patients with cancer pain.

A Review of Intrathecal Fentanyl and Sufentanil for the Treatment of Chronic Pain

Intrathecal infusion of morphine using implantable pumps is an accepted practice for long-term management of chronic pain. Despite clinical benefit, development of tolerance and side-effects associated with intrathecal morphine has prompted investigators to explore alternative opioids such as the potent anilinopiperidine analogs, fentanyl, and sufentanil. Relevant preclinical and clinical literature from the MEDLINE database was used primarily for this review. In vitro, both compounds are stable in solution, but studies have not been conducted using implantable pumps under simulated use conditions (e.g., long-term stability at body temperature). Preclinical studies of limited duration have demonstrated efficacy, but safety-toxicology studies have been limited to intermittent boluses of sufentanil only. Few clinical reports on the use of intrathecal sufentanil or fentanyl for chronic pain are available. Although results confirm potency and efficacy with intrathecal administration, further studies are needed to support the long-term use of either opioid in chronic pain management.