Inhibidores selectivos de COX-2 y analgesia / Selective COX-2 inhibitors and analgesia

No disponible

Itch: scratching more than the surface.

In origin, itch can be cutaneous ("pruritoceptive", e.g. dermatitis), neuropathic (e.g. multiple sclerosis), neurogenic (e.g. cholestasis), mixed (e.g. uraemia) or psychogenic. Although itch of cutaneous origin shares a common neural pathway with pain, the afferent C-fibres subserving this type of itch are a functionally distinct subset: they respond to histamine, acetylcholine and other pruritogens, but are insensitive to mechanical stimuli. Histamine is the main mediator for itch in insect bite reactions and in most forms of urticaria, and in these circumstances the itch responds well to H(1)-antihistamines. However, in most dermatoses and in systemic disease, low-sedative H(1)-antihistamines are ineffective. Opioid antagonists relieve itch caused by spinal opioids, cholestasis and, possibly, uraemia. Ondansetron relieves itch caused by spinal opioids (but not cholestasis and uraemia). Other drug treatments for itch include rifampicin, colestyramine and 17-alpha alkyl androgens (cholestasis), thalidomide (uraemia), cimetidine and corticosteroids (Hodgkin's lymphoma), paroxetine (paraneoplastic itch), aspirin and paroxetine (polycythaemia vera) and indometacin (some HIV+ patients). If the remedies specified fail, paroxetine and mirtazapine should be considered. Ultraviolet B therapy, particularly narrow-band UVB, may be superior to drug treatment for itch in uraemia.

Clinical-practice recommendations for the management of bowel obstruction in patients with end-stage cancer.

The paper highlights a series of questions that doctors need to consider when faced with end-stage cancer patients with bowel obstruction: Is the patient fit for surgery? Is there a place for stenting? Is it necessary to use a venting nasogastric tube (NGT) in inoperable patients? What drugs are indicated for symptom control, what is the proper route for their administration and which can be administered in association? When should a venting gastrostomy be considered? What is the role of total parenteral nutrition (TPN) and parenteral hydration (PH)? A working group was established to review issues relating to bowel obstruction in end-stage cancer and to make recommendations for management. A steering group was established by the (multidisciplinary) Board of Directors of the European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC) to select members of the expert panel, who were required to have specific clinical and research interests relating to the topic and to have published significant papers on advanced cancer patients in the last 5 years, or to have particular clinical expertise that is recognised internationally. The final constitution of this group was approved by the Board of the EAPC. This Working Group was made up of English, French and Italian physicians involved in the field of palliative care for advanced and terminal cancer patients; and of English, American and Italian surgeons who also specialized in artificial nutrition (Dr. Bozzetti) and a professor of health economics. We applied a systematic review methodology that showed the relative lack of RCTs in this area and the importance of retrospective and clinical reports from different authors in different countries. The brief was to review published data but also to provide clinical opinion where data were lacking. The recommendations reflect specialist clinical practice in the countries represented. Each member of the group was allocated a specific question and briefed to review the literature and produce a position paper on the indications, advantages and disadvantages of each symptomatic treatment. The position papers were circulated and then debated at a meeting held in Athens and attended by all panel members. The group reviewed all the available data, discussed the evidence and discussed what practical recommendations could be derived from it. An initial outline of the results of the review and recommendations was produced. Where there were gaps in the evidence, consensus was achieved by debate. Only unanimous conclusions have been incorporated. Subsequently the recommendations were drawn together by Carla Ripamonti (Chairperson) and Robert Twycross (Co-Chair) and refined with input from all panel members. The recommendations have been endorsed by the Board of Directors of the EAPC. It was concluded that surgery should not be undertaken routinely in patients with poor prognostic criteria, such as intra-abdominal carcinomatosis, poor performance status and massive ascites. A nasogastric tube should be used only as a temporary measure. Medical measures such as analgesics, anti-secretory drugs and anti-emetics should be used alone or in combination to relieve symptoms. A venting gastrostomy should be considered if drugs fail to reduce vomiting to an acceptable level. TPN should be considered only for patients who may die of starvation rather than from tumour spread. PH is sometimes indicated to correct nausea, whereas regular mouth care is the treatment of choice for dry mouth. A collaborative approach involving both surgeons and physicians can offer patients an individualized and appropriate symptom management plan.

Morphine and alternative opioids in cancer pain: the EAPC recommendations.

An expert working group of the European Association for Palliative Care has revised and updated its guidelines on the use of morphine in the management of cancer pain. The revised recommendations presented here give guidance on the use of morphine and the alternative strong opioid analgesics which have been introduced in many parts of the world in recent years. Practical strategies for dealing with difficult situations are described presenting a consensus view where supporting evidence is lacking. The strength of the evidence on which each recommendation is based is indicated.

Cancer pain classification.

About three quarters of patients with advanced cancer experience pain. Most of these have multiple pains. Causes of pain fall into four broad categories: the cancer itself, related to the cancer +/- debility, related to treatment, concurrent disorder. From a neuropathological perspective, pain is either nociceptive or neuropathic. This distinction is important because neuropathic pain is generally less responsive to analgesics than nociceptive pain. Recognition of functional muscle pain is important. Patients with severe chronic pain do not necessarily look in pain because of the absence of autonomic concomitants. Whatever the cause, pain is a "somatopsychic' experience.

A survey of pain in patients with advanced cancer.

One hundred eleven patients with advanced cancer and pain newly referred to a palliative care center completed the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) weekly for up to 4 weeks. The aims were (a) to review the numbers and causes of pain, (b) to consider the usefulness of the BPI in the evaluation of pain in cancer patients, and (c) to determine the impact of treatment. A total of 370 pains were recorded initially, a median of 3 per patient; 85% had more than 1 pain and more than 40% had 4 or more pains. Causes of pain were cancer (46%), debility (29%), treatment (5%), concurrent disorder (8%), and no stated cause (12%). The top 10 individual causes accounted for 73% of the pains. Seventy-six (68%) of the patients completed two BRIs, but only 46 (41%) completed 5. After 4 weeks, the median number of pains had fallen to 1.5; 78% still had more than 1 pain, but only 20% had 4 or more pains. Intensity of pain also declined, particularly in the first 2 weeks. With their last BPI, 23% had become completely pain free and a further 27% achieved acceptable relief (worst pain scores 1-4), compared with none and 24% initially. Of those who completed all five BPIs, the final respective figures were 22% and 29%. In contrast, 23% of patients still had unacceptable severe pain noted on their last BPI (worst pain scores 8-10), compared with 36% initially. Of those who completed five BPIs, the final figure was 20%. Highly significant correlations were observed between all seven interference factors and present, worst, and average pain intensities. After 4 weeks, the pattern was more variable, particularly in relation to present pain, suggesting that interference factors may have a limited utility as a measure of satisfactory pain management. Many patients did not answer all the questions in the BPI. It was concluded that the BPI is not brief enough for routine clinical use, and that the short form of the BPI (BPI-SF) is too short. A pain diary card will be developed comprising mainly pain scores, a pain relief score and a satisfaction with pain management score.

Midazolam for intractable hiccup.

We describe two terminally ill cancer patients severely distressed by intractable hiccup. Commonly recommended treatments were ineffective. Intravenous midazolam 5-10 mg rapidly relieved the hiccup. Maintenance treatment comprised midazolam 40-120 mg/24 hr by continuous subcutaneous infusion.

A 5-year review of a lymphoedema service.

Data for 714 patients referred during a 5-year period to a specialist lymphoedema service in Oxford, UK, have been recorded on a database. The annual number of new patients almost doubled from 103 to 195. In addition to initial assessments, there were over 1000 follow-up appointments per year. Most patients were seen as out-patients. Fifty-six per cent of the referrals were from Oxfordshire and the rest from further afield. The two largest groups referring patients to the service were general practitioners (43%) and the radiotherapy department (26%). Most referrals were female (84%), and the main cause of lymphoedema was cancer and cancer treatments (68%). After 2 years, only 15% of patients were still attending the clinic regularly. The number of patients receiving intensive treatment increased by almost 40%. These findings emphasize the need to target resources and expertise selectively in order to provide an optimal service to patients needing specialist help.