Coadministration of 5% glucose solution relieves vascular pain in the patients administered gemcitabine immediately

Risk Factors for Gemcitabine-Induced Vascular Pain in Patients With Pancreatic Cancer

BACKGROUND

Peripheral intravenous injection of gemcitabine often causes vascular pain; however, preventive measures have not yet been established.

OBJECTIVES

This study focused on identifying predictive factors for gemcitabine-induced vascular pain.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed risk factors for developing vascular pain in patients with pancreatic cancer receiving gemcitabine infusions at our institution. Infusions were divided into groups according to presence or absence of vascular pain symptoms, and variables were compared. Odds ratios for risk factors were calculated using logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

Overall, 272 patients with pancreatic cancer were subjected to 725 gemcitabine infusions, and of these, 18.4% (n = 50) experienced vascular pain. There were significant differences in the gemcitabine dose (P = 0.025), dose of gemcitabine/body surface area (BSA; P = 0.004), concentration of gemcitabine (P = 0.025), and hot pack use (P = 0.011) between the vascular pain and no vascular pain groups. Multivariable analyses indicated that gemcitabine dose/BSA and lack of hot pack use were risk factors for developing vascular pain. Moreover, on administration of a higher dosage (>930 mg/m²), the incidence of vascular pain in patients using a hot pack (6.7%) was significantly lower than that in patients not provided a hot pack (16.2%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

High gemcitabine dosages and lack of hot pack use were predictive factors for gemcitabine-induced vascular pain in patients with pancreatic cancer. Patients receiving gemcitabine treatment should apply a hot pack to the injection site. Scrupulous clinical attention is required for patients presenting with these risk factors to improve pain management.

Liquid Formulation of Gemcitabine Increases Venous Pain in Patients With Cancer: A Retrospective Study

PURPOSE

Venous pain induced by peripheral intravenous infusion of gemcitabine has remained an unresolved issue in clinical practice. This study aimed to identify differences between gemcitabine formulations as well as risk factors associated with gemcitabine-induced venous pain in patients with cancer.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed data from consecutive patients with cancer who had received chemotherapy including a lyophilized or liquid formulation of gemcitabine diluted with 5% glucose solution via a peripheral vein. The study was conducted at Ehime University Hospital using electronic medical records dated between January 2015 and July 2017. The primary end point was the prevalence of venous pain at the administration site during gemcitabine infusion, classified as injection site reaction of grade ≥2 according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0. A multivariate logistic regression analysis with generalized estimating equations for longitudinal data was used to identify risk factors for venous pain during all courses of gemcitabine treatment.

FINDINGS

A total of 1150 treatment courses in 141 Japanese patients were evaluated in this study. Venous pain occurred in 115 courses (10.0%) and in 49 patients (34.8%). The multivariate logistic regression analysis with generalized estimating equations revealed that a dose increase of gemcitabine and use of the liquid formulation of gemcitabine were significantly associated with an increased risk for venous pain (dose increase, adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 1.25; 95% CI, 1.11-1.40 [P < 0.001]; and liquid formulation, adjusted OR = 12.43, 95% CI, 5.61-27.51 [P < 0.001]), whereas age, course number of gemcitabine, and use of the soft-back product of 5% glucose solution were significantly associated with a reduced risk for venous pain (age, adjusted OR = 0.75; 95% CI, 0.57-0.98 [P = 0.037]; course number, adjusted OR = 0.96; 95% CI, 0.92-0.99 [P = 0.023]; and soft back, adjusted OR = 0.39; 95% CI, 0.21-0.74 [P = 0.004]).

IMPLICATIONS

The use of the liquid formulation of gemcitabine was associated with a significant increase in the frequency of gemcitabine-induced venous pain despite dilution with 5% glucose solution compared to that with the lyophilized formulation. The lyophilized formulation of gemcitabine should hence be used in peripheral intravenous infusion for the treatment of patients with cancer.

Treatment of Temporomandibular Dysfunction With Hypertonic Dextrose Injection (Prolotherapy): A Randomized Controlled Trial With Long-term Partial Crossover

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and longer-term effectiveness of dextrose prolotherapy injections in participants with temporomandibular dysfunction.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A randomized controlled trial with masked allocation was conducted from January 14, 2013, through December 19, 2015. Forty-two participants (with 54 joints) meeting temporomandibular dysfunction criteria were randomized (1:1) to 3 monthly intra-articular injections (20% dextrose/0.2% lidocaine or 0.2% lidocaine) followed by as-needed dextrose/0.2% lidocaine injections through 1 year. Primary and secondary outcome measures included a 0 to 10 Numerical Rating Scale score for facial pain and jaw dysfunction; maximal interincisal opening (MIO) measured in millimeters, percentage of joints with 50% or more change (improvement) in pain and function, and satisfaction.

RESULTS

Randomization produced a control group with more female participants (P=.03), longer pain duration (P=.01), and less MIO (P=.01). Upon 3-month analysis, including pertinent covariates, dextrose group participants reported decreased jaw pain (4.3±2.9 points vs 1.8±2.7 points; P=.02), jaw dysfunction (3.5±2.8 points vs 1.0±2.1 points; P=.008), and improved MIO (1.5±4.1 mm vs -1.8±5.1 mm; P=.006). Control group participants received dextrose injections beginning at 3 months. No between-group differences were noted at 12 months; pooled data suggested that jaw pain, jaw function, and MIO improved by 5.2±2.7 points (68%), 4.1±2.8 points (64%), and 2.1±5.5 mm, respectively. Pain and dysfunction improved by at least 50% in 38 of 54 (70%) and 39 of 54 (72%) jaws, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Intra-articular dextrose injection (prolotherapy) resulted in substantial improvement in jaw pain, function, and MIO compared with masked control injection at 3 months; clinical improvements endured to 12 months. Satisfaction was high.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01706172.

Analgesic Effect and Potential Cumulative Benefit from Caudal Epidural D5W in Consecutive Participants with Chronic Low-Back and Buttock/Leg Pain

Objectives: Chronic low-back pain (CLBP) participants in a prior controlled study reported short-term pain relief after caudal epidural injection of 5% dextrose (D5W). This study assessed whether repeated caudal epidural injections of D5W results in serial short-term diminution of CLBP and progressive long-term decrease in pain and disability.

Design: Prospective uncontrolled study.

Settings/Location: Outpatient pain clinic.

Subjects: Adults with CLBP with radiation to gluteal or leg areas.

Interventions: Caudal epidural injection of 10 mL of D5W (without anesthetic) every 2 weeks for four treatments and then as needed for 1 year.

Outcome measures: Numerical Rating Scale (NRS, pain, 0–10 points), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI, disability, %), and fraction of participants with ≥50% reduction in NRS score. Analysis by intention to treat.

Results: Participants (n = 32, 55 ± 9.8 years old, nine female) had moderate-to-severe CLBP (6.5 ± 1.2 NRS points) for 11.1 ± 10.8 years. They received 5.5 ± 2.9 caudal D5W injections through 12 months of follow-up. The data capture rate for analysis was 94% at 12 months for NRS and ODI outcome measures, with 6% carried forward by intention to treat. A consistent pattern of analgesia was demonstrated after D5W injection. Compared with baseline status, NRS and ODI scores improved by 3.4 ± 2.3 (52%) and 18.2 ± 16.4% (42%) points, respectively. The fraction of participants with 50% reduction in NRS-based pain was 21/32 (66%).

Conclusion: Epidural D5W injection, in the absence of anesthetic, resulted in consistent postinjection analgesia and clinically significant improvement in pain and disability through 12 months for most participants. The consistent pattern postinjection analgesia suggests a potential sensorineural effect of dextrose on neurogenic pain.

Transition from Deep Regional Blocks toward Deep Nerve Hydrodissection in the Upper Body and Torso: Method Description and Results from a Retrospective Chart Review of the Analgesic Effect of 5% Dextrose Water as the Primary Hydrodissection Injectate to Enhance Safety

Deep nerve hydrodissection uses fluid injection under pressure to purposely separate nerves from areas of suspected fascial compression, which are increasingly viewed as potential perpetuating factors in recalcitrant neuropathic pain/complex regional pain. The usage of 5% dextrose water (D5W) as a primary injectate for hydrodissection, with or without low dose anesthetic, could limit anesthetic-related toxicity. An analgesic effect of 5% dextrose water (D5W) upon perineural injection in patients with chronic neuropathic pain has recently been described. Here we describe ultrasound-guided methods for hydrodissection of deep nerve structures in the upper torso, including the stellate ganglion, brachial plexus, cervical nerve roots, and paravertebral spaces. We retrospectively reviewed the outcomes of 100 hydrodissection treatments in 26 consecutive cases with a neuropathic pain duration of 16 ± 12.2 months and the mean Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) 0-10 pain level of 8.3 ± 1.3. The mean percentage of analgesia during each treatment session involving D5W injection without anesthetic was 88.1%  ±  9.8%. The pretreatment Numeric Pain Rating Scale score of 8.3 ± 1.3 improved to 1.9 ± 0.9 at 2 months after the last treatment. Patients received 3.8 ± 2.6 treatments over 9.7 ± 7.8 months from the first treatment to the 2-month posttreatment follow-up. Pain improvement exceeded 50% in all cases and 75% in half. Our results confirm the analgesic effect of D5W injection and suggest that hydrodissection using D5W provides cumulative pain reduction.