高级检索
当前位置: 首页 > 详情页

Bilateral vs. unilateral endoscopic ultrasound-guided celiac plexus neurolysis for abdominal pain management in patients with pancreatic malignancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

| 导出 | |

文献详情

资源类型:
WOS体系:
Pubmed体系:

收录情况: ◇ SCIE

机构: [1]Department of Anesthesiology, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, No. 55 Renmin Road South, Chengdu 610000, Sichuan Province, People’s Republic of China [2]Department of Pain Management, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, People’s Republic of China
出处:
ISSN:

关键词: Endoscopic ultrasound Celiac plexus Neurolysis Bilateral Unilateral Meta-analysis

摘要:
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided celiac plexus neurolysis (EUS-CPN) by bilateral or unilateral approach is widely used in palliative abdominal pain management in pancreatic cancer patients, but the analgesic effect and relative risks of the two different puncture routes remain controversial. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the analgesic efficacy and safety of bilateral EUS-CPN compared with unilateral EUS-CPN. An electronic database search was performed for randomized controlled trials comparing bilateral and unilateral approaches of EUS-CPN using the Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and CNKI databases. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 after screening and methodological evaluation of the selected studies. Outcomes included pain relief, treatment response, analgesic reduction, complications, and quality of life (QOL). Six eligible studies involving 437 patients were included. No significant difference was found in short-term pain relief [SMD = 0.31, 95% CI (- 0.20, 0.81), P = 0.23] and response to treatment [RR = 0.99, 95% CI (0.77, 1.41), P = 0.97] between the bilateral and unilateral neurolysis groups. However, only the bilateral approach was associated with a statistically significant reduction in the postoperative use of analgesics [RR = 0.66, 95% CI (0.47, 0.94), P = 0.02] compared to the unilateral approach. A descriptive analysis was performed for complications and QOL. The short-term analgesic effect and general risk of bilateral EUS-CPN are comparable with those of unilateral EUS-CPN, but our evidence supports the conclusion that the bilateral approach significantly reduces postoperative analgesic use.

基金:

基金编号: fund number: 81500956

语种:
被引次数:
WOS:
PubmedID:
中科院(CAS)分区:
出版当年[2018]版:
大类 | 3 区 医学
小类 | 2 区 康复医学 3 区 卫生保健与服务 4 区 肿瘤学
最新[2023]版:
大类 | 3 区 医学
小类 | 2 区 康复医学 3 区 卫生保健与服务 3 区 肿瘤学
JCR分区:
出版当年[2018]版:
Q1 REHABILITATION Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Q3 ONCOLOGY
最新[2023]版:
Q1 REHABILITATION Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Q2 ONCOLOGY

影响因子: 最新[2023版] 最新五年平均 出版当年[2018版] 出版当年五年平均 出版前一年[2017版] 出版后一年[2019版]

第一作者:
第一作者机构: [1]Department of Anesthesiology, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, No. 55 Renmin Road South, Chengdu 610000, Sichuan Province, People’s Republic of China
通讯作者:
推荐引用方式(GB/T 7714):
APA:
MLA:

资源点击量:43389 今日访问量:0 总访问量:3120 更新日期:2024-09-01 建议使用谷歌、火狐浏览器 常见问题

版权所有©2020 四川省肿瘤医院 技术支持:重庆聚合科技有限公司 地址:成都市人民南路四段55号