Skip to content

Comparison of two methods of block for upper abdominal cancer pain-Ultrasound versus image guided technique in terms of quality of life and pain scores

Comparison between C-arm fluoroscopic guided posterior versus Percutaneous Ultrasound-guided anterior approach for celiac plexus neurolysis in patients with upper abdominal cancer in terms of pain relief and quality of life-A Prospective randomized comparative study

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
CTRI
Registry ID
CTRI/2018/05/014120
Enrollment
10
Registered
2018-05-25
Start date
Unknown
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2021-11-24

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Health Condition 1: null- Stage 4 upper abdominal cancer patients with pain and NRS more than 4

Interventions

Intervention1: Ultrasound guided celiac plexus block: o The patient will be placed in the supine position. After cleaning and draping, low frequency curved probe will be used in the longitudinal axis

Sponsors

Dr Sushma Bhatnagar
Lead Sponsor
Dr Anuradha Patel
Collaborator

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 1. Diagnosed case of upper abdominal cancer (lower third of the esophagus, stomach, pancreas, gall bladder, biliary tract) 2. Age 18-80 years 3. Either gender 4. Stage 4 (spread of cancer to distant organs like liver, lungs, brain or bones) 5. Patients in need of opioids for upper abdominal pain 6. NRS > 4 7. Feasible CPB on recent CT scan

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1. Patient on anticoagulation therapy 2. Local or intra-abdominal infection 3. Sepsis 4. Huge ascites 5. Patients with bowel obstruction 6. Patients with opioid addiction or history of drug abuse 7. Patients refusal to participate in the study 8. Clotting abnormalities 9. Psychiatric illness affecting cooperation 10. Previous history of neurolytic block 11. Unstable cardiovascular and respiratory diseases

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Analgesic efficacy in terms of opioid consumption and quality of life after 2 and 4 weeks of the blockTimepoint: Analgesic efficacy in terms of opioid consumption and quality of life after 2 and 4 weeks of the block

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Comparing efficacy of both the techniques in terms of 1. NRS pain scores 2. Side effects of block techniques 3. Patient satisfaction 4. Patient discomfort during the procedure 5. Duration of complete and effective analgesia Timepoint: Analgesic efficacy in terms of opioid consumption and quality of life after 2 and 4 weeks of the block

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactSushma Bhatnagar

AIIMS, New Delhi

sushmabhatnagar1@gmail.com9868398300

Outcome results

None listed

Source: CTRI (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026