Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Celiac Plexus Block Research Articles

Outcomes of pediatric endoscopic ultrasound-guided celiac plexus block: A single center pilot study.

Celiac plexus blocks (CPB) using endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guidance provide significant pain relief in adults with chronic pancreatitis. We present on EUS-guided CPB for pediatric patients with abdominal pain from chronic pancreatitis or severe functional dyspepsia necessitating clinically assisted nutrition and hydration. Patients who underwent EUS-CPB were included and followed prospectively at 2-, 4-, and 8-weeks postprocedure about pain, enteral tolerance, and school/activity attendance. Thirteen patients underwent EUS-guided CPB with a total of 21 procedures. In the pancreatitis cohort, mean pain relief was 11.7 weeks for those who responded. In the functional dyspepsia cohort, mean improvement (in either pain or enteral tolerance) was 4.8 weeks. Symptom improvement varied between the two cohorts. Acute recurrent/chronic pancreatitis patients demonstrated more sustained relief than the functional dyspepsia cohort. This study adds to the limited data investigating the utility of EUS-CPB as part of a multimodal treatment plan in pediatrics.

S95 Efficacy of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Celiac Plexus Block in Chronic Pancreatitis: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

S95 Efficacy of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Celiac Plexus Block in Chronic Pancreatitis: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Advances in the Management of Pain in Chronic Pancreatitis.

The data on recent advances in managing chronic pancreatitis (CP) pain is limited. This review highlights the role of endotherapy and the advances in the overall management of pain in CP. Of late, pancreatic biodegradable stents have been used in endotherapy with appreciable success. These include slow, medium, and fast degrading stents, which optimize the overall management of CP and could prevent the need for multiple procedures. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided celiac plexus block is reserved in selected patients to treat debilitating pain. Total pancreatectomy with islet autotransplantation in small duct disease has shown promising results. The indications for treating pain in CP with endoscopy and surgery need to be better defined. The complexity of pain control due to the incomplete understanding of pathomorphology makes the management of CP challenging. The current treatment methods are still evolving. Therapy aims to reduce pain, optimize recovery, maintain quality of life, and meet postoperative needs. Initial management includes lifestyle modification, nutrition optimization, risk factor reduction with abstinence from alcohol, cessation of tobacco and smoking. Supportive medical management involves the judicial use of analgesics, neuromodulators, antioxidants, pancreatic enzyme replacement for insufficiency, and diabetes management. Patients with intractable pain are ideal for therapeutic intervention. Being less invasive with an acceptable complication rate makes endotherapy the preferred first-line treatment. If found to be cost-effective, biodegradable stents can reduce the overall cost. Unfortunately, if patients remain symptomatic, surgery is preferred in case of failure or recurrence. For optimal results, appropriate patient selection is vital to maximizing outcomes.

S995 Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Celiac Plexus Block for Pain Relief in Chronic Pancreatitis Is an Effective Procedure When Used Judiciously

S995 Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Celiac Plexus Block for Pain Relief in Chronic Pancreatitis Is an Effective Procedure When Used Judiciously

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Celiac Plexus Block and Celiac Neurolysis: A Systematic Review of Efficacy, Safety, and Protocols

Introduction: The advent of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided celiac plexus block (CPB) and celiac plexus neurolysis (CPN) has provided immeasurable benefit for patients with pain from chronic pancreatitis and pancreatic malignancies. There are differences in efficacy based on indication and protocol used for CPN and CPB. Here we aim to characterize efficacy, safety, and variations in protocol of both EUS-guided CPB and CPN by performing a systematic review of the literature. Methods: Using predefined keywords a search was performed using the EMBASE, Medline, and Cochrane databases through January 2018. Abstracts that discussed the outcomes of EUS-guided CPN and/or CPB were considered for inclusion. Data was abstracted from all papers, including demographic information, indication for CPN and CPB, protocol used for CPN and CPB, outcomes of intervention, and complication rates of endoscopy. Weighted data was used to calculate the efficacy and complications. Results: Following a database search, 437 abstracts were reviewed. 35 studies were selected for data abstraction of which 8 were randomized trials, 16 prospective, and 11 retrospective. 1290 patients underwent CPN and 714 underwent CPB. In those undergoing CPB and CPN, the main indications were chronic pancreatitis (98%, 698/714) and pancreatic cancer (99%, 1278/1290) respectively. In studies reporting the rate of response, overall initial response was 64% (873/1369). CPN and CPB had an initial response rate of 65% (482/745, range 25-100%) and 63% (391/624, range 0-100%) respectively. When celiac ganglia were targeted, response was 74% (68/92, range 65-94%). Duration of response varied widely across all studies and interpretation was limited by duration of follow-up. No deaths or perforations were reported. There was 1 upper gastrointestinal bleed and 1 peri-pancreatic abscess attributed to the intervention. The most common side effects were transient diarrhea and transient hypotension. In regards to anesthetic agents used, bupivacaine 0.25-0.75%, lidocaine 1.0-2.0%, and xylocaine 1.0% were all used. Triamcinolone was used in doses ranging from 40-160 mg. Finally, alcohol 95-99% was used in doses ranging from <5 ml to 20 ml. One study looked at the efficacy of phenol 7% as a neurolytic agent in those intolerant of alcohol. Conclusion: Overall, CPB and CPN appear to be effective and safe modalities at controlling pain. Due to variations in protocol, clinical guidelines are required to outline best-practice for both EUS-guided CPB and CPN.

Effectiveness and safety of serial endoscopic ultrasound-guided celiac plexus block for chronic pancreatitis.

Background and study aims: Endoscopic ultrasound – guided celiac plexus block (EUS-CPB) is an established treatment for pain in patients with chronic pancreatitis (CP), but the effectiveness and safety of repeated procedures are unknown. Our objective is to report our experience of repeated EUS-CPB procedures within a single patient. Patients and methods: A prospectively maintained EUS database was retrospectively analyzed to identify patients who had undergone more than one EUS-CPB procedure over a 17-year period. The main outcome measures included number of EUS-CPB procedures for each patient, self-reported pain relief, duration of pain relief, and procedure-related adverse events. Results: A total of 248 patients underwent more than one EUS-CPB procedure and were included in our study. Patients with known or suspected CP (N = 248) underwent a mean (SD) of 3.1 (1.6) EUS-CPB procedures. In 76 % of the patients with CP, the median (range) duration of the response to the first EUS-CPB procedure was 10 (1 – 54) weeks. Lack of pain relief after the initial EUS-CPB was associated with failure of the next EUS-CPB (OR 0.17, 95 %CI 0.06 – 0.54). Older age at first EUS-CPB and pain relief after the first EUS-CPB were significantly associated with pain relief after subsequent blocks (P = 0.026 and P = 0.002, respectively). Adverse events included peri-procedural hypoxia (n = 2) and hypotension (n = 1) and post-procedural orthostasis (n = 2) and diarrhea (n = 4). No major adverse events occurred. Conclusions: Repeated EUS-CPB procedures in a single patient appear to be safe. Response to the first EUS-CPB is associated with response to subsequent blocks.

Repeat Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Celiac Plexus Block and Neurolysis: What Is the Efficacy and Safety?: ACG/AstraZeneca Fellow Award

Repeat Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Celiac Plexus Block and Neurolysis: What Is the Efficacy and Safety?: ACG/AstraZeneca Fellow Award

Endoscopic Therapy in Chronic Pancreatitis

Chronic pancreatitis (CP) is a debilitating disease that can result in chronic abdominal pain, malnutrition, and other related complications. The main aims of treatment are to control symptoms, prevent disease progression, and correct any complications. A multidisciplinary approach involving medical, endoscopic, and surgical therapy is important. Endoscopic therapy plays a specific role in carefully selected patients as primary interventional therapy when medical measures fail or in patients who are not suitable for surgery. Endoscopic therapy is also used as a bridge to surgery or as a means to assess the potential response to pancreatic surgery. This review addresses the role of endoscopic therapy in relief of obstruction of the pancreatic duct (PD) and bile du ct, closure of PD leaks, and drainage of pseudocysts in CP. The role of endoscopic ultrasound-guided celiac plexus block for pain in chronic pancreatitis is also discussed.

What is the role of endotherapy in chronic pancreatitis?

Chronic pancreatitis (CP) can have debilitating clinical course due to chronic abdominal pain, malnutrition and related complications. Medical, endoscopic and surgical treatment of CP should aim at control of symptoms, prevention of progression of the disease and correction of complications. Endoscopic management plays a specific role in carefully selected patients as primary interventional therapy when medical measures fail or in high-risk surgical candidates. Endotherapy for CP is utilized also as a bridge to surgery or to assess potential response to pancreatic surgery. In this review we address the role of endotherapy for the relief of obstruction of the pancreatic duct (PD) and bile duct, closure of PD leaks and drainage of pseudocysts in the setting of CP. In addition, endotherapy for relief of pancreatic pain by endoscopic ultrasound-guided celiac plexus block for CP is discussed.

Efficacy of Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Celiac Plexus Block and Celiac Plexus Neurolysis for Managing Abdominal Pain Associated With Chronic Pancreatitis and Pancreatic Cancer

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided celiac plexus block (CPB) and celiac plexus neurolysis (CPN) have become important interventions in the management of pain due to chronic pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer. However, only a few well-structured studies have been performed to evaluate their efficacy. Given limited data, their use remains controversial. Herein, we evaluate the efficacy of EUS-guided CPB and CPN in alleviating chronic abdominal pain due to chronic pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer respectively. Using Medline, Pubmed, and Embase databases from January 1966 through December 2007, a thorough search of the English literature for studies evaluating the efficacy of EUS-guided CPB and CPN for the management of chronic abdominal pain due to chronic pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer was conducted, along with a hand search of reference lists. Studies that involved less than 10 patients were excluded. Data on pain relief was extracted, pooled, and analyzed. A total of 9 studies were included in the final analysis. For chronic pancreatitis, 6 relevant studies were identified, comprising a total of 221 patients. EUS-guided CPB was effective in alleviating abdominal pain in 51.46% of patients. For pancreatic cancer, 5 relevant studies were identified with a total of 119 patients. EUS-guided CPN was effective in alleviating abdominal pain in 72.54% of patients. EUS-guided CPB was 51.46% effective in managing chronic abdominal pain in patients with chronic pancreatitis, but warrants improvement in patient selection and refinement of technique, whereas EUS-guided CPN was 72.54% effective in managing pain due to pancreatic cancer and is a reasonable option for patients with tolerance to narcotic analgesics.

Endoscopic ultrasound: Moving from diagnostics to therapeutics

Endoscopic ultrasound was initially introduced in the 1980s as a diagnostic modality using echoendoscopes with radial scanning that permitted reconstruction of cross-sectional images similar to computed tomography The close proximity of the ultrasound transducer to the gastrointestinal wall and retroperitoneal structures allowed a detailed examination that is not possible with cross-sectional imaging such as computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. It proved to be highly accurate and useful in the staging of gastrointestinal malignancies, as well as in characterizing the nature of subepithelial lesions and disorders of the pancreaticobiliary system. The introduction of linear echoendoscopes facilitated fine needle aspiration because, with linear scanning, it was able to trace the path of the tip of the needle during the puncture process. In addition to being very useful for tissue acquisition for diagnostic purposes, the principles behind endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration paved the way for the development of therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound. Substances could now be delivered by endoscopic ultrasound into targeted areas, an example being an endoscopic ultrasound-guided celiac plexus block and neurolysis. In addition, the endoscopic ultrasound-guided puncture of fluid collections, abscesses and obstructed biliary and pancreatic ductal systems facilitated the passage of guidewires, thus allowing therapeutic drainage procedures to be performed using the Seldinger technique. This review summarizes the diagnostic capability of endoscopic ultrasound and then moves on to elaborate in detail its therapeutic capability and potential.

EUS-guided celiac block and neurolysis

Abdominal pain related to pancreatic cancer or chronic pancreatitis can be a disabling and difficult symptom to treat for patients, their families, and physicians. Pharmacologic therapy with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs is usually ineffective. Opiate analgesics may not be well tolerated and can lead to dependence. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided celiac plexus block offers a potential adjunct treatment for pain control.

Medical therapy for chronic pancreatitis pain.

Chronic pancreatitis should be considered in all patients with unexplained abdominal pain. Management of abdominal pain in these patients continues to pose a formidable challenge. The importance of small duct disease without radiographic abnormalities is now a well-established concept. It is meaningful to determine whether patients with chronic pancreatitis have small duct or large duct disease because this distinction has therapeutic implications. Diagnostic evaluation should begin with simple noninvasive and inexpensive tests like serum trypsinogen and fecal elastase, to be followed where appropriate by more complicated measures such as the secretin hormone stimulation test, especially in patients with suspected small duct disease. No universal causal treatment is available. Non-enteric-coated enzyme preparations are useful for treatment of pain, whereas enteric-coated enzyme preparations are preferred for steatorrhea. Octreotide is used increasingly for abdominal pain that is unresponsive to pancreatic enzyme therapy. When medical therapy for chronic pancreatitis pain has failed, endoscopic therapy, endoscopic ultrasound-guided celiac plexus block, and thoracoscopic splanchnicectomy, performed by experts, may be considered for a highly selected patient population. Surgical ductal decompression is appropriate in patients with considerable pancreatic ductal dilation. The role and efficacy of cholecystokinin-receptor antagonists, antioxidants, and antidepressant drugs remain to be defined.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Celiac Plexus Block for Managing Abdominal Pain Associated With Chronic Pancreatitis: A Prospective Single Center Experience

In our previous randomized trial, we suggested a possible role for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided celiac plexus block in the treatment of abdominal pain associated with chronic pancreatitis. The purpose of this study was to evaluate our prospective experience with EUS-guided celiac plexus block for controlling pain attributed to chronic pancreatitis, including follow-up on response rates and complications. All subjects enrolled had documented chronic pancreatitis by ERCP and EUS criteria and presented with chronic abdominal pain unresponsive to current treatment options. All were treated with EUS-guided celiac plexus block under the guidance of linear array endosonography using a 22-gauge FNA needle (GIP, Mediglobe Inc., Tempe, AZ) inserted on each side of the celiac area, followed by injection of 10 cc bupivacaine (0.25%) and 3 cc (40 mg) triamcinolone on each side of the celiac plexus. Individual pain scores, based on a visual analog scale (0-10), were determined preblock and postblock by a nurse at 2, 7, 14 days and monthly thereafter. Subjects also rated their overall comfort level during the EUS procedure. EUS-guided celiac plexus block was performed in 90 subjects (40 males, 50 females) having a mean age of 45 yr (range 17-76 yr) between July 1, 1995 and December 30, 1996. A significant improvement in overall pain scores occurred in 55% (50/90) of patients. The mean pain score decreased from 8 to 2 post EUS celiac block at both 4 and 8 wk follow-up (p < 0.05). In 26% of patients there was persistent benefit beyond 12 wk, and 10% still had persistent benefit at 24 wk, including three patients who were pain-free between 35 and 48 wk. Younger patients (<45 yr of age) and those having previous pancreatic surgery for chronic pancreatitis were unlikely to respond to the EUS-guided celiac block. Three patients experienced diarrhea post EUS celiac block, which resolved in 7-10 days; however, it is unclear whether this diarrhea was due to the block or to refractory disease. A cost comparison between the EUS ($1200) and CT ($1400) techniques shows the EUS celiac block to be less costly and perhaps more cost efficient in a subset of subjects. EUS-guided celiac plexus block appears to be safe, effective, and economical for controlling pain in some patients with chronic pancreatitis. Younger patients (<45 yr) and those having prior pancreatic surgery for chronic pancreatitis do not appear to benefit from this technique. Prophylactic antibiotics should be considered if acid suppressing agents are being taken.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided celiac plexus block for managing abdominal pain associated with chronic pancreatitis: a prospective single center experience

OBJECTIVE: In our previous randomized trial, we suggested a possible role for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided celiac plexus block in the treatment of abdominal pain associated with chronic pancreatitis. The purpose of this study was to evaluate our prospective experience with EUS-guided celiac plexus block for controlling pain attributed to chronic pancreatitis, including follow-up on response rates and complications. METHODS: All subjects enrolled had documented chronic pancreatitis by ERCP and EUS criteria and presented with chronic abdominal pain unresponsive to current treatment options. All were treated with EUS-guided celiac plexus block under the guidance of linear array endosonography using a 22-gauge FNA needle (GIP, Mediglobe Inc., Tempe, AZ) inserted on each side of the celiac area, followed by injection of 10 cc bupivacaine (0.25%) and 3 cc (40 mg) triamcinolone on each side of the celiac plexus. Individual pain scores, based on a visual analog scale (0–10), were determined preblock and postblock by a nurse at 2, 7, 14 days and monthly thereafter. Subjects also rated their overall comfort level during the EUS procedure. RESULTS: EUS-guided celiac plexus block was performed in 90 subjects (40 males, 50 females) having a mean age of 45 yr (range 17–76 yr) between July 1, 1995 and December 30, 1996. A significant improvement in overall pain scores occurred in 55% (50/90) of patients. The mean pain score decreased from 8 to 2 post EUS celiac block at both 4 and 8 wk follow-up ( p < 0.05). In 26% of patients there was persistent benefit beyond 12 wk, and 10% still had persistent benefit at 24 wk, including three patients who were pain-free between 35 and 48 wk. Younger patients (<45 yr of age) and those having previous pancreatic surgery for chronic pancreatitis were unlikely to respond to the EUS-guided celiac block. Three patients experienced diarrhea post EUS celiac block, which resolved in 7–10 days; however, it is unclear whether this diarrhea was due to the block or to refractory disease. A cost comparison between the EUS ($1200) and CT ($1400) techniques shows the EUS celiac block to be less costly and perhaps more cost efficient in a subset of subjects. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-guided celiac plexus block appears to be safe, effective, and economical for controlling pain in some patients with chronic pancreatitis. Younger patients (<45 yr) and those having prior pancreatic surgery for chronic pancreatitis do not appear to benefit from this technique. Prophylactic antibiotics should be considered if acid suppressing agents are being taken.