Efectividad del bloqueo neurolítico simpático abdominal en una serie de casos descriptiva en pacientes con dolor oncológico / Effectiveness of neurolytic sympathetic plexus block in a descriptive case series of patients with oncological pain / Efetividade do bloqueio neurolítico simpático abdominal em uma série descritiva de casos em pacientes com dor oncológica

Introducción. El dolor es el principal síntoma que se presenta en el 40% de los pacientes oncológicos en tratamiento y en entre el 80% y el 85% de pacientes con la enfermedad avanzada. Dentro de las herramientas farmacológicas, los opioides son una opción con los consecuentes efectos secundarios, momento en el cual los procedimientos intervencionistas adquieren su importancia. El objetivo del artículo es mostrar el impacto sobre el control del dolor y la calidad de vida en paciente con dolor oncológico abdominal sometido a bloqueo celíaco o hipogástrica en un periodo de 3 meses, con el fin de generar conocimiento del tema en el área de la salud. Metodología. Se realizó una serie descriptiva de casos en un período de 3 meses. Se incluyeron 34 pacientes adultos con dolor abdominal de origen oncológico, con propuesta de bloqueo neurolítico de plexos celíacos o hipogástrico superior como método de control del dolor y se realizó un análisis de las variables en el programa estadístico IBM SPSS Versión 19. Resultados. Se encontró alivio del dolor en el 79.4% de los pacientes intervenidos al poco tiempo del procedimiento y de 33.3% a los 3 meses. No se encontró significante mejoría en la calidad de vida evaluada con el cuestionario SF-36. Conclusiones. Se encontró en este estudio que pacientes con índice de Karnofsky <50 tuvieron alta tasa de mortalidad posterior al bloqueo. La técnica de fenolización más radiofrecuencia podrían tener mejor respuesta terapéutica. Son necesarios más estudios para evaluar posibles asociaciones. Cómo citar. Jaimes J, Leotau MA, Rangel GW, Miranda N, García-Salazar N, Rangel-Vera JA. Efectividad del bloqueo neurolítico simpático abdominal en una serie de casos descriptiva en pacientes con dolor oncológico. MedUNAB. 2019;22(3):330-340. doi: 10.29375/01237047.3337

Introduction. Pain is the main symptom that occurs in 40% of cancer patients undergoing treatment and between 80% and 85% of patients with advanced cancer. Out of the pharmacological tools, opioids are an option with secondary effects, which makes interventional procedures important. The objective of the article is to demonstrate the impact of celiac or hypogastric plexus block in a three-month period on the pain control and quality of life of patients with abdominal oncological pain in order to generate knowledge of this topic in the healthcare sector. Methodology. A descriptive case series was conducted in a three-month period. Thirtyfour adult patients with oncological abdominal pain with proposed celiac or superior hypogastric plexus block as a method of pain control were included and an analysis was conducted of the variables in the statistical program IBM SPSS Version 19. Results. Pain relief was found in 79.4% of the treated patients shortly after the procedure and in 33.3% of the treated patients after 3 months. No significant improvement was evidenced in the quality of life evaluated with the SF-36 questionnaire. Conclussions. The study found that patients with a Karnofsky performance score of < 50 had a high mortality rate after the block. The technique of phenolization and radiofrequency could have a better therapeutic response. More studies are needed to assess possible associations. Cómo citar. Jaimes J, Leotau MA, Rangel GW, Miranda N, García-Salazar N, Rangel-Vera JA. Efectividad del bloqueo neurolítico simpático abdominal en una serie de casos descriptiva en pacientes con dolor oncológico. MedUNAB. 2019;22(3):330-340. doi: 10.29375/01237047.3337

Introdução. A dor é o principal sintoma que ocorre em 40% dos pacientes oncológicos em tratamento e entre 80% e 85% dos pacientes com a doença avançada. Dentro das ferramentas farmacológicas, os opióides são uma opção com consequentes efeitos colaterais, momento em que os procedimentos intervencionistas se tornam importantes. Objetivo. O objetivo do artigo é mostrar o impacto no controle da dor e na qualidade de vida em pacientes com dor oncológica abdominal submetido a bloqueio celíaco ou do plexo hipogástrico em um período de 3 meses, a fim de gerar conhecimento sobre o assunto na área da saúde. Métodos. Foi feita uma série descritiva de casos durante um período de 3 meses. Foram incluídos 34 pacientes adultos com dor abdominal de origem oncológica, com proposta de bloqueio neurolítico do plexo celíaco ou hipogástrico superior como método de controle da dor e a análise das variáveis foi realizada no programa SPSS statistic 19 IBM. Resultados. Observou-se alívio da dor em 79.4% dos pacientes operados logo após o procedimento e em 33.3% 3 meses depois. Não houve melhora significativa na qualidade de vida avaliada com o questionário SF-36. Discussão. Encontrou-se neste estudo que pacientes com índice de Karnofsky > 50 apresentaram alta taxa de mortalidade após o bloqueio. A técnica de fenolização e a radiofrequência poderiam ter melhor resposta terapêutica. Mais estudos são necessários para avaliar possíveis associações. Cómo citar. Jaimes J, Leotau MA, Rangel GW, Miranda N, García-Salazar N, Rangel-Vera JA. Efectividad del bloqueo neurolítico simpático abdominal en una serie de casos descriptiva en pacientes con dolor oncológico. MedUNAB. 2019;22(3):330-340. doi: 10.29375/01237047.3337

Emotional disclosure through patient narrative may improve pain and well-being: results of a randomized controlled trial in patients with cancer pain.

Narrative medicine is based upon physicians' awareness of patients' narration of their suffering, their hopes, and how illness has affected them. It offers a model for improving health outcomes. To determine whether incorporating a narrative approach in patients with cancer decreases pain intensity and improves their global sense of well-being, we performed a randomized, single-blind controlled trial in adult patients with cancer and average pain intensity levels of at least 5/10. Two hundred thirty-four patients were randomized into three groups: (1) narrative (n=79), in which patients wrote a story about how cancer affected their lives for at least 20 minutes once a week for three weeks; (2) questionnaire (n=77), in which patients filled out the McGill Pain Questionnaire; and (3) control (n=78), in which patients came weekly to medical visits during which they received usual customary care. Patients rated their pain on a 0-10 scale and their well-being on a seven-point Likert scale weekly for eight weeks. Two raters independently evaluated the emotional content of the narratives. Pain intensity and sense of well-being were similar in all groups before and after treatment. Subgroup analyses showed that patients whose narratives had high emotional disclosure had significantly less pain and reported higher well-being scores than patients whose narratives were less emotional. Further study is needed to demonstrate whether the implementation of narrative medicine is associated with health benefits in this and other contexts.

An N-of-1 trial as an aid to decision-making prior to implanting a permanent spinal cord stimulator.

OBJECTIVE: Limited evidence supports the efficacy of spinal cord stimulation (SCS). Therefore, it is crucial to assess the usefulness of this invasive procedure before implanting permanent electrodes in each patient. An N-of-1 trial is an experiment in which a single participant undergoes periods of comparative treatments. We illustrate how an N-of-1 trial design may permit clinicians to conduct such an assessment in an individual patient. DESIGN: Case report. SETTING: University teaching hospital. PATIENTS: A 61-year-old man patient with refractory postherpetic neuralgia scheduled for SCS implantation. INTERVENTIONS: Percutaneous octapolar lead placement into the epidural space for SCS at T5-T6, and placement of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulator (TENS) electrodes upon the painful area on the patient's back. We provided electrical stimulation via TENS or SCS according to a computer-generated random number list. Each stimulation period lasted 5 hours, followed by 1 hour of rest. OUTCOME MEASURES: At the end of each period, a blinded assessor evaluated the degree of pain relief, pain intensity, area of stimulation, and the patient's satisfaction. The study had a 5-day duration. Results. In this patient, spinal stimulation was equally efficacious as TENS. CONCLUSIONS: We encourage clinicians to perform an N-of-1 trial in every patient before implanting permanent electrodes for SCS.

Static magnetic therapy does not decrease pain or opioid requirements: a randomized double-blind trial.

A growing multibillion dollar industry markets magnetic necklaces, bracelets, bands, insoles, back braces, mattresses, etc., for pain relief, although there is little evidence for their efficacy. We sought to evaluate the effect of magnetic therapy on pain intensity and opioid requirements in patients with postoperative pain. We designed a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial. One-hundred-sixty-five patients older than 12 yr of age were randomized to magnetic (n = 81) or sham therapy (n = 84) upon reporting moderate-to-severe pain in the postanesthesia care unit. Devices were placed over the surgical incision and left in place for 2 h. Patients rated their pain intensity on a 0-10 scale every 10 min and received incremental doses of morphine until pain intensity was < or =4 of 10. Pain intensity levels were similar in both groups. The magnet group had on average 0.04 U more pain intensity (95% confidence interval, -0.4 to 0.5) than the sham group. Opioid requirements also were similar in both groups. The active magnet group required 1.5 mg more morphine (95% confidence interval, -1.8 to 4.0) than the sham magnet group. Magnetic therapy lacks efficacy in controlling acute postoperative pain intensity levels or opioid requirements and should not be recommended for pain relief in this setting.

Comparison of morphine, ketorolac, and their combination for postoperative pain: results from a large, randomized, double-blind trial.

BACKGROUND: Meta-analyses report similar numbers needed to treat for nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opioids. Differences in baseline pain intensity among the studies from which these numbers needed to treat were derived may have confounded the results. NSAIDs have an opioid-sparing effect, but the importance of this effect is unclear. Therefore, the authors sought to compare the proportions of subjects who obtain pain relief with ketorolac versus morphine after surgery and to determine whether the opioid-sparing effect of an NSAID reduces the magnitude of opioid side effects. METHODS: The study was a double-blind, randomized controlled trial. The authors randomly assigned 1,003 adult patients to receive 30 mg ketorolac or 0.1 mg/kg morphine intravenously. They calculated the proportion of subjects who achieved at least 50% reduction in pain intensity 30 min after analgesic administration. Further, so long as pain intensity 30 min after analgesic administration was 5 or more out of 10, patients received 2.5 mg morphine every 10 min until pain intensity was 4 or less out of 10. The authors assessed the presence of opioid-related side effects. RESULTS: Five hundred patients received morphine and 503 received ketorolac. Fifty percent of patients in the morphine group achieved pain relief, compared with 31% in the ketorolac group (difference, 19%; 95% confidence interval, 13-25%). The ketorolac-morphine group required less morphine (difference, 6.5 mg; 95% confidence interval, -5.8 to -7.2) and had a lower incidence of side effects (difference, 11%; 95% confidence interval, 5-16%) than the morphine group. CONCLUSIONS: Opioids are more efficacious analgesics than NSAIDs, although historic data for these two drugs yield similar numbers needed to treat. Adding NSAIDs to the opioid treatment reduces morphine requirements and opioid-related side effects in the early postoperative period.