Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2018
EUS-guided celiac ganglion radiofrequency ablation versus celiac plexus neurolysis for palliation of pain in pancreatic cancer: a randomized controlled trial (with videos).
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеVideo-Audio MediaНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Bang Ji Young, Sutton Bryce, Hawes Robert H, Varadarajulu Shyam
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Although EUS-guided celiac plexus neurolysis (EUS-CPN) is frequently performed, its efficacy for palliation of pain in pancreatic cancer is suboptimal. Recently, EUS-guided radiofrequency ablation (EUS-RFA) has been proposed as a palliative treatment option for pancreatic neoplasms. We performed a single-blind, randomized trial to compare the effectiveness of EUS-CPN and EUS-RFA for palliation of pain in pancreatic cancer.
METHODS: Patients with abdominal pain because of locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer underwent EUS-CPN (n = 14) or EUS-RFA (n = 12). EUS-RFA was performed using a 1F monopolar probe passed via a 19-gauge FNA needle, by targeting the area of celiac plexus or visualized ganglia. Primary outcome was pain severity as measured by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire pancreatic cancer module (PAN26) administered pretreatment and at 2 and 4 weeks post-treatment. Secondary outcome measures were comparison of quality of life as determined by the PAN26 and EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire core questionnaire (C30) and opioid analgesia use between the 2 groups.
RESULTS: Both the PAN26 (49.0 vs 57.0, P < .001) and C30 (51.9 vs 64.4, P = .032) revealed less pain for EUS-RFA than for EUS-CPN. Also, the EUS-RFA cohort experienced significantly less-severe GI symptoms, were able to plan more for the future, and had better emotional functioning compared with the EUS-CPN group.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with EUS-CPN, EUS-RFA provided more pain relief and improved the quality of life for patients with pancreatic cancer. (Clinical trials registration number: NCT03152487.).
METHODS: Patients with abdominal pain because of locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer underwent EUS-CPN (n = 14) or EUS-RFA (n = 12). EUS-RFA was performed using a 1F monopolar probe passed via a 19-gauge FNA needle, by targeting the area of celiac plexus or visualized ganglia. Primary outcome was pain severity as measured by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire pancreatic cancer module (PAN26) administered pretreatment and at 2 and 4 weeks post-treatment. Secondary outcome measures were comparison of quality of life as determined by the PAN26 and EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire core questionnaire (C30) and opioid analgesia use between the 2 groups.
RESULTS: Both the PAN26 (49.0 vs 57.0, P < .001) and C30 (51.9 vs 64.4, P = .032) revealed less pain for EUS-RFA than for EUS-CPN. Also, the EUS-RFA cohort experienced significantly less-severe GI symptoms, were able to plan more for the future, and had better emotional functioning compared with the EUS-CPN group.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with EUS-CPN, EUS-RFA provided more pain relief and improved the quality of life for patients with pancreatic cancer. (Clinical trials registration number: NCT03152487.).