Efficacy of Superior Hypogastric Plexus Neurolysis for the Treatment of Cancer-Related Pelvic Pain

OBJECTIVE

Cancer-related abdominal and pelvic pain syndromes can be debilitating and difficult to treat. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of superior hypogastric plexus blockade or neurolysis (SHPN) for the treatment of cancer-related pelvic pain.

DESIGN

Retrospective study.

SETTING

MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.

METHODS

We enrolled 46 patients with cancer-related pelvic pain who underwent SHPN. A numeric rating scale (NRS) was used for pain intensity, and symptom burden was evaluated using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System at baseline, visit 1 (within one month), and visit 2 (within one to six months).

RESULTS

Forty-six patients who received SHPN showed a significant reduction in pain score from 6.9 to 5.6 at visit 1 (P = 0.01). Thirty of the 46 patients continued to complete visit 2 follow-up, and the NRS score was consistently lower at 4.5 at visit 2 (P < 0.0001), with anxiety and appetite improved significantly. There was no significant change in the morphine equivalent dose at visits 1 and 2. The efficacy of the block was not influenced by patients' age, gender, type of cancer, cancer stage, regimen of chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy, diagnostic block, approach or laterality of procedure, or type or amount of neurolytic agent. Nonsmokers with high baseline pain scores were more likely to have improved treatment outcomes from SHPN at short-term follow-up. Adverse effects with SHPN were mild and well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

SHPN was an effective and relatively safe procedure for pain associated with pelvic malignancies. There is a need for larger prospective trials.

Cancer pain management in China: current status and practice implications based on the ACHEON survey

Purpose

Cancer pain can seriously impact the quality of life (QoL) of patients, and optimal management practices are therefore of paramount importance. The ACHEON survey queried physicians and patients from 10 Asian countries/regions to assess current clinical practices in cancer pain management in Asia. This study presents the data obtained for cancer pain management in mainland China, with an emphasis on practices related to opioid drugs.

Materials and methods

In several tertiary hospitals across China, 250 patients experiencing cancer pain and 100 physicians were surveyed on questions designed to assess current cancer pain management practices and cancer pain impact on QoL.

Results

The patient survey showed that 88% of patients reported moderate-to-severe cancer pain, with a median duration of 6 months. The physician survey showed that medical school/residency training with regard to cancer pain management was inadequate in ~80% of physicians. A total of 80% of physicians and 67.2% of patients reported that pain scale was used during pain assessment; 84% of physicians expressed that physician-perceived pain severity was not completely consistent with actual pain the patient experienced. Of the 147 patients who recalled the medication received, 83.7% were administered opioid prescriptions. Of the 240 patients who received treatment, 43.8% perceived the inadequacy of controlling pain. The primary barriers from physicians perceived to optimal pain management included patients’ fear of side effects (58%), patients’ fear of addiction (53%), patients’ reluctance to report pain (43%), physicians’ reluctance to prescribe (29%), physicians’ inadequacy of pain assessment (27%) and excessive regulation of opioid analgesics (47%).

Conclusion

Knowledge of cancer pain management should be strengthened among physicians. Quantitative pain assessment and principle-based pain management should be combined to achieve pain relief. Misconceptions about opioids in patients and physicians and poor report about pain should be overcome through training/education to improve QoL of patients impacted by pain.

New Cancer Pain Treatment Options

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cancer pain is often incapacitating and discouraging to patients; is demoralizing to family members and care takers; and is taxing and difficult to subdue for the pain specialists. The consequences of implementing suboptimal treatment are far-reaching; therefore, effective treatment methods are in a great demand. The face of cancer pain management has changed in considerable ways, and interventional procedures have become an integral part of providing multimodal analgesia in cancer pain treatment. The goals of this review are to draw attention to the critical role that regional anesthetic nerve blocks and interventional pain management techniques play in treating malignancy-related pain and emphasize the benefits provided by the aforementioned treatment strategies.

RECENT FINDINGS

A large proportion of cancer patients continues to struggle with an inadequately treated pain despite a strict adherence to the WHO analgesic step ladder. The previous pain treatment algorithm has been modified to include peripheral neural blockade, neuro-destructive techniques, neuromodulatory device use, and intrathecal drug delivery systems. The accumulated evidence highlights the opioid-sparing qualities and other benefits afforded by these modalities: decreasing medication-induced side effects, reducing economic burden of poor analgesia, and overall improvement in quality of life of the patients afflicted with a painful neoplastic disease. The rising prevalence of cancer-related pain syndromes is paralleled by an unmatched growth of innovative treatment strategies. Modified WHO analgesic ladder represents one of the greatest paradigm shifts within the domain of oncologic pain treatment. The cancer patient population requires a prompt and liberal, albeit judicious, delivery of unorthodox pain treatment options freed from the rigid bonds of conventional guidelines and standard practices.

Opioid prescribing habits of physicians in Kwara State, Nigeria

OBJECTIVE

Although opioid analgesics are effective in the treatment of moderate to severe acute, cancer and chronic non-malignant pains, they are under-prescribed in Nigeria. The objective of this study was to assess the prescription pattern of opioids among physicians in a north central State, Nigeria..

DESIGN

This was a descriptive cross sectional study.

SETTING

The study was conducted at the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP)-sponsored workshops on pain and palliative care at the University of Ilorin Teaching Hospital, Ilorin, Nigeria.

PARTICIPANTS

These were physicians at the monthly workshops organized by the Pain and Palliative Care Unit of the hospital between August 2011 and July, 2012.

INTERVENTIONS

Pre-tested semi-structured questionnaires were used to obtain responses to questions on pain management including opioids utilization in the various hospitals of the 114 participants.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcome measure was opioid prescription by the participants.

RESULTS

Out of the 114 questionnaires distributed, 113 were returned with complete information giving a response rate of 99.1%. The mean age of the respondents was 42.0±10.8 years. Although 97.3% of the respondents reported that pain was a frequent complaint in their practice, 69.5% of those who reported seeing patients with moderate to severe pain on a daily basis rarely or never prescribed opioid analgesics. The reasons given for poor opioid prescription were fear of respiratory depression (86.8%), fear of addiction (85.1%) and non-availability (28.9%).

CONCLUSION

Opioid prescription rate for patients with moderate-severe pain is low possibly due to myths and misconceptions about their adverse effects.

FUNDING

International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) Initiative for Improving Pain Education Grant awarded to Dr. K.W. Wahab in 2011.

Evidence-based Clinical Practice Guidelines for Interventional Pain Management in Cancer Pain

Intractable cancer pain not amenable to standard oral or parenteral analgesics is a horrifying truth in 10-15% of patients. Interventional pain management techniques are an indispensable arsenal in pain physician's armamentarium for severe, intractable pain and can be broadly classified into neuroablative and neuromodulation techniques. An array of neurolytic techniques (chemical, thermal, or surgical) can be employed for ablation of individual nerve fibers, plexuses, or intrathecalneurolysis in patients with resistant pain and short life-expectancy. Neuraxial administration of drugs and spinal cord stimulation to modulate or alter the pain perception constitutes the most frequently employed neuromodulation techniques. Lately, there is a rising call for early introduction of interventional techniques in carefully selected patients simultaneously or even before starting strong opioids. After decades of empirical use, it is the need of the hour to head towards professionalism and standardization in order to secure credibility of specialization and those practicing it. Even though the interventional management has found a definite place in cancer pain, there is a dearth of evidence-based practice guidelines for interventional therapies in cancer pain. This may be because of paucity of good quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating their safety and efficacy in cancer pain. Laying standardized guidelines based on existing and emerging evidence will act as a foundation step towards strengthening, credentialing, and dissemination of the specialty of interventional cancer pain management. This will also ensure an improved decision-making and quality of life (QoL) of the suffering patients.

The efficacy of low-dose transdermal fentanyl in opioid-naïve cancer patients with moderate-to-severe pain

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Little is known about the efficacy of low-dose transdermal fentanyl (TDF) patches in opioid-naïve patients with moderate-to-severe cancer pain.

METHODS

This study had an open-label, prospective design, and was conducted between April 2007 and February 2009 in seven tertiary cancer hospitals; 98 patients were enrolled. TDF was started using a low-dose formulation (12.5 µg/hr), and the dose was adjusted according to the clinical situation of individual patients. Pain intensity, the TDF doses used, and adverse events (AEs) were monitored over 4 weeks. Data were analyzed using the intent-to-treat and per-protocol principles.

RESULTS

Of the 98 patients enrolled, 64 (65%) completed the study. The median pain intensity decreased from 6.0 to 3.0 (p < 0.001) at the follow-up visit. The efficacy of low-dose TDF on pain relief was consistent across groups separated according to gender (p < 0.001), age (p < 0.001), metastasis (p < 0.001), previous treatment (p < 0.001), and baseline pain intensity (p < 0.001). The decrease in pain intensity was significantly greater in the severe group compared with the moderate group (mean ± SD, 5.10 ± 2.48 vs. 2.48 ± 1.56; p < 0.001). TDF dose (27.8 µg/hr vs. 24.8 µg/hr, p = 0.423) and the mean treatment time (7.5 days vs. 7.9 days, p = 0.740) required for pain control were not different between the two pain-intensity groups. Patients had AEs of only mild or moderate intensity; among these, nausea (38%) was the most common, followed by vomiting (22%) and somnolence (22%).

CONCLUSIONS

Low-dose TDF was an effective treatment for patients with cancer pain of moderate-to-severe intensity. Further randomized trials assessing the efficacy of TDF for severe pain and/or optimal starting doses are warranted.

The management of pain in metastatic bone disease

BACKGROUND

Metastatic bone disease is a common cause of pain in cancer patients. A multidisciplinary approach to treatment is often necessary because simplified analgesic regimens may fail in the face of complex pain generators, especially those involved in the genesis of neuropathic pain. From the origins of formalized guidelines by the World Health Organization (WHO) to recent developments in implantable therapies, great strides have been made to meet the needs of these patients.

METHODS

The authors review the existing literature on the pathophysiology and treatment options for pain generated by metastatic bone disease and summarize classic and new approaches.

RESULTS

Relatively recent animal models of malignant bone disease have allowed a better understanding of the intimate mechanisms involved in the genesis of pain, resulting in a mechanistic approach to its treatment. Analgesic strategies can be developed with specific targets in mind to complement the classic, opioid-centered WHO analgesic ladder obtaining improved outcomes and quality of life. Unfortunately, high-quality evidence is difficult to produce in pain medicine, and these concepts are evolving slowly.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment options are expanding for the challenging clinical problem of painful metastatic bone disease. Efforts are concentrated on developing alternative nonopioid approaches that appear to increase the success rate and improve patients' quality of life.

Transformation of acute cancer pain to chronic cancer pain syndromes

For many cancer survivors, disease-related long-term morbidities and the application of advanced cancer treatments have resulted in the development of a chronic pain state. This brief review explores the relationship between what is known about the treatment of active cancer pain syndromes-both continuous pain and breakthrough pain-and persisting pain syndromes in cancer survivors. We also posit that because there is evidence to suggest that poorly treated acute pain can lead to protracted pain conditions, acute pain should be recognized and treated promptly, both for short- and long-term gain. In the short term, better acute pain treatment can improve functionality and psychological well-being, whereas in the long term, mounting evidence suggests that it could prevent of future chronic pain.

The role of chemical neurolysis in cancer pain

Pain continues to be a significant symptom burden in cancer patients, with prevalence in 53% of patients at all stages of cancer and as high as 58% to 69% in those with advanced cancer. Neurolytic blocks are a mainstay in the armamentarium of cancer pain management, more so in intractable pain from advanced cancer. There is no clear consensus on patient selection, technique, or timing of these blocks. Here we discuss the use of various neurolytic blocks for cancer pain and detail some of the recent literature and our experience.