Endoscopic-ultrasound versus percutaneous-guided celiac plexus block for chronic pancreatitis pain. A systematic review and meta-analysis

Descripción del Articulo

Background: Abdominal pain is present in the vast majority of patients with chronic pancreatitis, being frequently debilitating. Celiac plexus block (CPB) is an interventional technique that can be considered to provide a temporary pain relief. Objective: To estimate the effectiveness and safeness o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Nobre Moura, Renata, Guimarães Hourneaux De Moura, Eduardo, Marques Bernardo, Wanderley, Otoch, Jose P., Castillo Bustamante, Fabio Alberto, Vieira Albers, Débora, Rodela Silva, Gustavo Luis, Marques Chaves, Dalton, de Almeida Artifon, Everson Luiz
Formato: artículo
Fecha de Publicación:2017
Institución:Sociedad de Gastroenterología del Perú
Repositorio:Revista de Gastroenterología del Perú
Lenguaje:español
OAI Identifier:oai:ojs.revistagastroperu.com:article/99
Enlace del recurso:http://www.revistagastroperu.com/index.php/rgp/article/view/99
Nivel de acceso:acceso abierto
Materia:Pancreatitis
chronic
Pain management
Celiac plexus
Endosonography
Meta-analysis
Descripción
Sumario:Background: Abdominal pain is present in the vast majority of patients with chronic pancreatitis, being frequently debilitating. Celiac plexus block (CPB) is an interventional technique that can be considered to provide a temporary pain relief. Objective: To estimate the effectiveness and safeness of endoscopic-ultrasound (EUS) comparing with percutaneous-guided CBP in patients with pancreatic pain. Methods: A systematic review of English and non-English articles using MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS and COCHRANE (via BVS). Study selection and data extraction: Only randomized control trials (RCT) comparing the beneficial and harmful effects of EUS and percutaneous-guided celiac plexus block for managing pancreatic pain were included. Data was extracted and analyzed on variables including pain relief and related procedure complications. Results: Two RCT met the inclusion criteria. Both studies assessed the primary outcome (reduction on pain score) and evaluated adverse effects. The drugs injected were the same; nevertheless percutaneous technique was guided by fluoroscopy in one study and by computer tomography (CT) in other. The results showed that the EUS-CPB group was more effective to reduce pain score after 4 weeks after the procedure, with risk of bias to do this affirmation. No statistical difference in pain relief at 1, 8 and 12 weeks and in complications rates. Conclusions: Based on this systematic review and meta-analysis, no statistically significant difference was noted in pain relief and complications for EUS and percutaneous - CPB.
Nota importante:
La información contenida en este registro es de entera responsabilidad de la institución que gestiona el repositorio institucional donde esta contenido este documento o set de datos. El CONCYTEC no se hace responsable por los contenidos (publicaciones y/o datos) accesibles a través del Repositorio Nacional Digital de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación de Acceso Abierto (ALICIA).