UNASSIGNED: To compare the efficacy of EUS-guided celiac plexus neurolysis (CPN) and celiac plexus irradiation with iodine-125 (125I) seeds with absolute ethanol for relieving pain in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.
UNASSIGNED: We retrospectively analyzed data of 81 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer who underwent EUS-CPN or EUS-125I implantation between January 2017 and December 2020. Postoperative pain was assessed using visual analog scale (VAS) scores; self-assessments of quality of life and the median survival time were compared between the 2 groups.
UNASSIGNED: EUS-CPN and 125I implantation were performed in 43 and 38 patients, respectively. Postoperative VAS scores were significantly lower than the preoperative levels in both groups. One week after the operation, 26 patients (60.5%) in the EUS-CPN group achieved partial pain relief, whereas no patients in the EUS-125I seed group experienced pain relief. However, after 4 weeks postoperatively, VAS scores had decreased, and the rate of partial pain relief was higher for EUS-125I seeds than for EUS-CPN. Self-assessments of quality of life were similar in both groups during the first 1 month after the procedure.
UNASSIGNED: Both EUS-CPN and EUS-125I seeds can safely and effectively relieve pain in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. Although EUS-125I seeds take additional time to show effects, the extent and duration of pain relief are better compared with CPN, and interestingly, the median survival time was different.

Recent years have brought to light newly developed therapeutic modalities for the treatment of premalignant and malignant pancreatic lesions. The role of EUS-guided radiofrequency ablation (EUS-RFA) as a treatment modality for malignant pancreatic lesions is still under evaluation. Several animal studies and human studies have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of EUS-RFA in the management of premalignant and malignant pancreatic lesions. EUS-RFA therapy can potentially ablate these lesions safely and with minimally invasive techniques. In this article, we provide an updated review of the application of EUS-RFA of pancreatic lesions. We also review the clinical efficacy and safety of this technique and future directions.

The emergence of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has significantly impacted the diagnosis and management of pancreatic cancer and its associated sequelae. While the definitive role of EUS for pancreatic cancer remains incompletely characterized by currently available guidelines, EUS undoubtedly offers high diagnostic accuracy, the precise staging of pancreatic neoplasms, and the ability to perform therapeutic and palliative interventions. However, current challenges to EUS include limited specialized expertise and variability in operator proficiency. As the technology and techniques continue to evolve and become more refined, EUS is poised to play an increasingly integral role in shaping pancreatic cancer care.

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is an integrated diagnostic technique merging endoscope and ultrasound to examine the digestive system. EUS has emerged as a primary diagnostic method for pancreatic diseases due to its distinctive benefits. Over the past four decades, EUS has undergone a transformation, shifting its role from primarily diagnostic to increasingly therapeutic. Additionally, in recent years, EUS has emerged as an increasingly prominent adjunctive or alternative approach to conventional surgical interventions. This review provides a comprehensive analysis of current technological approaches in the treatment of pancreatic diseases. The dynamic interplay with diverse therapeutic approaches has reinvigorated EUS and shaped its trajectory in the management of pancreatic diseases.

UNASSIGNED: The management of chronic pain among patients with abdominal cancer is complex; against that, the neurolysis of the celiac plexus (CPN) is the best technique at the moment to determine the efficacy and safety in the treatment of chronic pain secondary to oncological pathology of the upper abdomen.
UNASSIGNED: This was a systematic review of controlled clinical trials between 2000 and 2021, in the sources MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Three independent evaluators analysed the results of the bibliographical research. The quality of the studies was assessed with the Jadad scale and the mean difference (95% confidence interval) and heterogeneity of the studies (I2) were calculated with Review Manager 5.3.
UNASSIGNED: Seven hundred and forty-four publications were identified, including 13 studies in the qualitative synthesis and three studies in the quantitative synthesis. No difference was found in the decrease in pain intensity between 1 and 12 weeks after the intervention, comparing the experimental group with the control (P > 0.05). The adverse effects related to neurolysis were not serious and transitory, mentioning the most frequent adverse effects and reporting a percentage between 21% and 67% (with 17% for echoendoscopic neurolysis and 49% for percutaneous neurolysis).
UNASSIGNED: Celiac plexus neurolysis for the treatment of severe chronic pain secondary to oncological pathology in the upper hemiabdomen produces similar pain relief as conventional pharmacological analgesic treatment. It is a safe analgesic technique since the complications are mild and transitory.

The diagnosis and management of pancreatic cancer has become a standard role for the endoscopic oncologist. Pancreatic cancer can produce disabling abdominal pain, and the medical management of this pain is often challenging. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided celiac plexus neurolysis and celiac ganglia neurolysis serve as an alternative or adjunct for pain control in these patients. There remains a great deal of practice variability with regard to techniques and approaches. This article summarizes the latest scientific evidence and highlights contemporary best practice advice for these procedures.

UNASSIGNED: Currently, short-term recurrence of pain is the biggest clinical challenge of celiac plexus neurolysis for patients with refractory abdominal cancer pain.
UNASSIGNED: To evaluate the analgesic effect and safety of celiac plexus neurolysis using ethanol injection combined with iodine-125 (125I) radioactive seed implantation for refractory abdominal cancer pain.
UNASSIGNED: The study was a randomized controlled trial.
UNASSIGNED: About 10 patients with severe refractory abdominal cancer pain were enrolled in this study. The patients were randomly divided into group A (ethanol injection combined with 125I radioactive seed implantation, n = 5) and group B (ethanol injection alone, n = 5). The primary end point was pain relief measured by means of numerical rating scale (NRS). And the secondary end point was mean administration of analgesic drugs and the safety of the procedure.
UNASSIGNED: Repeated measures of analysis of variance were used for statistical analysis.
UNASSIGNED: The NRS scores were significantly reduced by 24 h postprocedure in both groups (group A: P = 0.001 and group B: P = 0.001). Group A did not show significant recurrence based on NRS scores during the follow-up period. In contrast, the NRS scores recurred significantly in group B by 1 month postprocedure (P = 0.026). The intake of analgesic drugs was significantly reduced in both the groups postprocedure (group A: P = 0.013 and group B: P = 0.013). Overall, it was significantly lower in group A than in group B (P = 0.041). No treatment-related deaths or major complications were observed.
UNASSIGNED: Celiac plexus neurolysis using ethanol injection in combination with 125I radioactive seed implantation has a longer analgesic duration than using ethanol injection alone. It could be a safe and long-lasting analgesic approach for managing refractory abdominal cancer pain.

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies to evaluate the analgesic efficacy and safety of computed tomography (CT)-guided single celiac plexus neurolysis (CPN) with the injection of a neurolytic agent into the celiac plexus in one session (CT-guided single CPN).
PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Ichushi-Web were searched for English or Japanese articles published up to February 2022, which reported findings about patients who underwent CT-guided single CPN. The outcome measures assessed in the systematic review and meta-analysis were the pain measurement scales from 0 to 10 before and after the intervention and the rate of minor and major complications.
The pooled pain measurement scales at pre-intervention and 1- or 2-, 7-, 30-, 60-, 90-, and 180-day post-intervention was 6.72 (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.77-9.46, I2 = 98%), 2.31 (95% CI 2.31-4.44, I2 = 92%), 2.84 (95% CI 1.39-5.79, I2 = 95%), 3.36 (95% CI 1.66-6.77, I2 = 98%), 3.19 (95% CI 1.44-7.08, I2 = 59%), 3.87 (95% CI 1.88-7.97, I2 = 0%), and 3.40 (95% CI 3.02-3.83, I2 = not applicable), respectively. The pooled minor complication rates of diarrhea, hypotension, nausea or vomiting, and pain associated with the procedure were 18% (95% CI 8-37%, I2 = 45%), 16% (95% CI 2-58%, I2 = 76%), 6% (95% CI 2-16%, I2 = 1%), and 7% (95% CI 2-21%, I2 = 17%), respectively. There was no major complication in the included studies.
CT-guided single CPN can be performed safely and provides immediate analgesic efficacy although the amount of heterogeneity is characterized as large. Further investigation of its long-term analgesic efficacy is required.

Celiac plexus neurolysis (CPN) has been developed as adjunctive therapy to medical management (MM) of abdominal pain associated with unresectable pancreatic cancer. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to obtain updated and more accurate evidence on the efficacy of additional types of CPN, including endoscopic ultrasound-guided CPN (EUS-CPN).
On March 16, 2021, we performed searches of PubMed, Web of Science, and CENTRAL for original randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We defined the primary outcome as a standardized pain intensity score with a range of 0-10, and evaluated the mean difference between the CPN + MM and MM groups at 4, 8, and 12 weeks after the initiation of treatment. We used a random-effects model to synthesize the mean differences across RCTs.
We selected 10 RCTs involving 646 individuals. The synthesized mean difference in the pain intensity score between the CPN + MM and MM groups was -0.58 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.09 to -0.07) (p = 0.034) in favor of CPN + MM at 4 weeks, -0.46 (95%CI: -1.00 to 0.08) (p = 0.081) at 8 weeks, and - 1.35 (95%CI: -3.61 to 0.92) (p = 0.17) at 12 weeks.
This updated meta-analysis of CPN demonstrates its efficacy for managing abdominal pain at 4 weeks. Although there are various limitations, when abdominal pain in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer is poorly controlled with MM alone, CPN should be an option even if the duration of effect is short-lived, taking into account the absence of serious adverse events.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided celiac plexus neurolysis (EUS-CPN) in combination with EUS-guided celiac ganglia neurolysis (EUS-CGN) for pancreatic cancer-associated pain.
METHODS: This multicenter prospective trial was registered in the University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN000031228). Fifty-one consecutive patients with pancreatic cancer-associated pain who presented at one of five Japanese referral centers between February 2018 and March 2021 were enrolled. EUS-CGN was added in cases of visible celiac ganglia. The primary endpoint was effectiveness, defined as a decrease in the numerical rating scale (NRS) by ≥ 3 points. NRS data were prospectively acquired at 1 week after the procedure to evaluate its effectiveness and the extent of pain relief.
RESULTS: The technical success rates of EUS-CPN and EUS-CGN were 100% and 80.4%, respectively. The overall efficacy rate was 82.4% [90% confidence interval (CI) 71.2-90.5, P < 0.0001]. The complete pain relief rate was 27.4%. The adverse events rate was 15.7%. The average pain relief period was 72 days. The efficacy rate was higher in the EUS-CPN plus EUS-CGN group than in the EUS-CPN alone group. EUS-CPN plus EUS-CGN was superior to EUS-CPN alone for achieving complete pain relief (P = 0.045). EUS-CGN did not improve the average length of the pain relief period.
CONCLUSIONS: EUS-CPN combined with EUS-CGN is safe, feasible, and effective for pain relief in patients with pancreatic cancer. The patients who received additional EUS-CGN had a better short-term response.
BACKGROUND: UMIN000031228.