A new technique for inferior hypogastric plexus block: a coccygeal transverse approach -a case report-

Sympathetic nerve blocks for persistent pain in adults with inoperable abdominopelvic cancer

BACKGROUND

Persistent visceral pain is an unpleasant sensation coming from one or more organs within the body. Visceral pain is a common symptom in those with advanced cancer. Interventional procedures, such as neurolytic sympathetic nerve blocks, have been suggested as additional treatments that may play a part in optimising pain management for individuals with this condition.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of neurolytic sympathetic nerve blocks for persistent visceral pain in adults with inoperable abdominopelvic cancer compared to standard care or placebo and comparing single blocks to combination blocks.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases without language restrictions on 19 October 2022 and ran a top-up search on 31 October 2023: CENTRAL; MEDLINE via Ovid; Embase via Ovid; LILACS. We searched trial registers without language restrictions on 2 November 2022: ClinicalTrials.gov; WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We searched grey literature, checked reference lists of reviews and retrieved articles for additional studies, and performed citation searches on key articles. We also contacted experts in the field for unpublished and ongoing trials. Our trial protocol was preregistered in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews on 21 October 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any sympathetic nerve block targeting sites commonly used to treat abdominal pelvic pain from inoperable malignancies in adults to standard care or placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently selected trials based on predefined inclusion criteria, resolving any differences via adjudication with a third review author. We used a random-effects model as some heterogeneity was expected between the studies due to differences in the interventions being assessed and malignancy types included in the study population. We chose three primary outcomes and four secondary outcomes of interest. We sought consumer input to refine our review outcomes and assessed extracted data using Cochrane's risk of bias 2 tool (RoB 2). We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE system.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 17 studies with 1025 participants in this review. Fifteen studies with a total of 951 participants contributed to the quantitative analysis. Single block versus standard care Primary outcomes No included studies reported our primary outcome, 'Proportion of participants reporting no worse than mild pain after treatment at 14 days'. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of sympathetic nerve blocks on reducing pain to no worse than mild pain at 14 days when compared to standard care due to insufficient data (very low-certainty evidence). Sympathetic nerve blocks may provide small to 'little to no' improvement in quality of life (QOL) scores at 14 days after treatment when compared to standard care, but the evidence is very uncertain (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.70 to 0.25; I² = 87%; 4 studies, 150 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the risk of serious adverse events as defined in our review as only one study contributed data to this outcome. Sympathetic nerve blocks may have an 'increased risk' to 'no additional risk' of harm compared with standard care (very low-certainty evidence). Secondary outcomes Sympathetic nerve blocks showed a small to 'little to no' effect on participant-reported pain scores at 14 days using a 0 to 10 visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain compared with standard care, but the evidence is very uncertain (mean difference (MD) -0.44, 95% CI -0.98 to 0.11; I² = 56%; 5 studies, 214 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There may be a 'moderate to large' to 'little to no' reduction in daily consumption of opioids postprocedure at 14 days with sympathetic nerve blocks compared with standard care, but the evidence is very uncertain (change in daily consumption of opioids at 14 days as oral milligrams morphine equivalent (MME): MD -41.63 mg, 95% CI -78.54 mg to -4.72 mg; I² = 90%; 4 studies, 130 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of sympathetic nerve blocks on participant satisfaction with procedure at 0 to 7 days and time to need for retreatment or treatment effect failure (or both) due to insufficient data. Combination block versus single block Primary outcomes There is no evidence about the effect of combination sympathetic nerve blocks compared with single sympathetic nerve blocks on the proportion of participants reporting no worse than mild pain after treatment at 14 days because no studies reported this outcome. There may be a small to 'little to no' effect on QOL score at 14 days after treatment, but the evidence is very uncertain (very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the risk of serious adverse events with combination sympathetic nerve blocks compared with single sympathetic nerve blocks due to limited reporting in the included studies (very low-certainty evidence). Secondary outcomes The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of combination sympathetic nerve blocks compared with single sympathetic nerve blocks on participant-reported pain score and change in daily consumption of opioids postprocedure, at 14 days. There may be a small to 'little to no' effect, but the evidence is very uncertain (very low-certainty evidence). There is no evidence about the effect on participant satisfaction with procedure at 0 to 7 days and time to need for retreatment or treatment effect failure (or both) due to these outcomes not being measured by the studies. Risk of bias The risk of bias was predominately high for most outcomes in most studies due to significant concerns regarding adequate blinding. Very few studies were deemed as low risk across all domains for any outcome.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is limited evidence to support or refute the use of sympathetic nerve blocks for persistent abdominopelvic pain due to inoperable malignancy. We are very uncertain about the effect of combination sympathetic nerve blocks compared with single sympathetic nerve blocks. The certainty of the evidence is very low and these findings should be interpreted with caution.

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.

Inferior Hypogastric Block for the Treatment of Chronic Pelvic Pain

Context

Pelvic pain is described as pain originating from the visceral or somatic system localizing to the pelvis, the anterior abdominal wall at the level of or below the umbilicus, lumbosacral back in either men or women.

Evidence Acquisition

Narrative review.

Results

Chronic pelvic pain can be a complex disorder that may involve multiple systems such as urogynecological, gastrointestinal, neuromusculoskeletal, and psychosocial systems. The etiopathogenesis for chronic pain remains unknown for many patients. For achieving optimal patient management, a multimodal and individualized assessment of each patient is the best strategy.

Conclusions

There are non-pharmacologic treatments as well as pharmacologic treatments. In addition to these treatment options, inferior hypogastric plexus block is a promising treatment modality.

Rectal enema of bupivacaine in cancer patients with tenesmus pain - case series

Introduction: Rectal tenesmus pain in cancer patients most frequently appears in patients with colon cancer, and as a consequence of radiotherapy of the hypogastrium region. Treatment with opioids and adjuvant analgesics is often ineffective. Patients and methods: Here, we report on two female patients diagnosed with colon and ovary cancer, respectively, who had very severe tenesmus pain (numerical rating scale 8-10) despite using high doses of opioids, including methadone with corticosteroids, anticonvulsants, antidepressants and ketamine. Results: In both patients, bupivacaine was administered via a rectal enema. In the first patient, bupivacaine was administered at a dose of 100 mg 0.1% (100 mL), and subsequently 100 mg 0.2% (50 mL), leading to effective analgesia for 8 and 12 hrs, respectively. In the second patient, 100 mg 0.1% (100 mL) was initially administered, followed by 100 mg 0.2% (50 mL), leading to effective analgesia for 12 and 17 hrs, respectively, with only dull abdominal pain reported that was relieved by 100 mg IV ketoprofen and complete disappearance of tenesmus pain. Rectal bupivacaine administration did not cause neurologic adverse effects, heart function disturbances or decreased blood pressure. A volume of 50 mL was enough to cover a painful area in the colon. Initial bupivacaine concentrations in the blood serum did not exceed 50 ng/mL and eventually dropped to 20 ng/mL and below. Conclusions: Administration of 100 mg bupivacaine as a rectal enema is safe and provides effective analgesia, and this procedure may be conducted in hospital departments and out-patient clinics. Furthermore, this procedure in the case of pain recurrence, can be repeated, and by providing effective pain relief often allows time for the patient to be transferred to a specialized pain center.