• A Vainio and I Tigerstedt.
• Department of Anaesthesia, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Finland.
• Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1988 Apr 1; 32 (3): 179-85.

AbstractIn order to determine the optimal pain treatment for patients with cancer involvement of the brachial or lumbar nerve plexuses, a prospective comparative study was carried out using peroral opioid therapy (SO), epidural opioid by a conventional tunnelled epidural catheter (CE) or an epidural catheter connected to an implanted injection port (Port). Pain relief, measured by a visual analog scale (VAS), was similar and adequate in every group already after the first 24 h. CNS side-effects were less frequent and the Karnofsky performance grades slightly superior in the epidural groups. Occlusion and catheter disconnection complicated the pain therapy of five epidural port patients. Epidural dislocation occurred three times in the conventional epidural group. One local infection in the CE group and two in the Port group were recorded. However, no signs of epidural infection were seen at autopsy. The results suggest that due to a lower incidence of side-effects, epidural catheter techniques are superior to peroral opioid in treating pain in these patients. However, complete pain relief was not achieved in all patients, suggesting neurogenic, non-nociceptive pain components. Both epidural techniques seem suitable for long-term pain therapy. Technical improvements are needed in the epidural catheter and the port. The long-term epidural catheter does not seem to cause any major changes in the histology of the dura mater or the connective tissue of the epidural space.

18 keywords...

hide…