Abstract 2102P
Background
It is known that the prevalence of pain in terminal cancer patients reaches 70-90%, and the intensity of pain is very extreme. The intrathecal morphine pump (ITP) has been recognized for effective pain control in cancer pain, but, it is usually recommended to cancer patients with more than one year of life expentancy. This study aimed to find out the usefulness of the ITP through the change in opioid usage before and after pump implantation in patients with terminal cancer.
Methods
A total of 20 patients were included, retrospectively. Morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD) and pain intensity (visual analogue scale, 0-10) were collected at baseline, 1, and 3months after insertion of ITP. Also, each patient’s demographic data, diagnosis, stage and type of cancer were recorded.
Results
The mean age of 20 patients is 56.2±15.9 (years) and the female was nine. In addition, patients with colorectal, advanced, and prostate cancer accounted for 60% of the patients. The duration of ITP maintenance until the death of patients was 7±10.5 months. The MEDD was increased at 3 months after implantation of ITP compared to baseline (P=0.03). In addition, the pain relief effect lasted at 3 months after the procedure (P=0.03) (Table).
Table: 2102P
Changes in morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD) and pain intensity after intrathecal morphine pump implantation
Baseline | 1 month after the procedure | 3 months after the procedure | |
MEDD (mg) | 506.7±482.5 | 1131±1227.4 | 858.1±655.81 |
Pain intensity (VAS, 0-10) | 7.5±1.3 | 6.8±3.3 | 5.4±2.51 |
1Statistically significant value compared to baseline (p < 0.05). The values are expressed as the mean ± SD. VAS=visual analogue scale
Conclusions
In patients with terminal cancer requiring high doses of opioids for pain control, the use of ITP implantation can offer effective pain relief while reducing opioid toxicity and side effects. Additionally, clinical evidence suggests that ITP implantation may provide value for patients with a life expectancy of less than one year.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
2106P - Safety and patient reported outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with cancer
Presenter: Amy Body
Session: Poster session 06
2107P - Thromboprophylaxis with intermediate or prophylactic doses of LMWHs in ambulatory cancer patients
Presenter: Nikolaos Tsoukalas
Session: Poster session 06
2108P - Vitamin B12 and its clinical relevance in hospitalized cancer patients
Presenter: Stefano Maccarone
Session: Poster session 06
2109P - Vitamin A, D and E levels in patients with solid tumors undergoing palliative systemic cancer treatment
Presenter: Julia Berger
Session: Poster session 06
2111P - The value of multiple psychometric tools for distress screening and referral in a cancer population
Presenter: Daniel Anderson
Session: Poster session 06
2112P - Initial geriatric assessment and chemotherapy tolerability treatment in Brazilian patients with malignant neoplasm of the digestive system
Presenter: Marcos Dumont Bonfin Santos
Session: Poster session 06
2113P - Efficacy and effectiveness of prophylactic magnesium supplementation on prevention of cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Presenter: Caio Castro
Session: Poster session 06
2114P - Impact of comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) in the management of chemotherapy toxicity in older cancer patients
Presenter: Jordi Recuero-Borau
Session: Poster session 06
2115P - Pre-cachexia incidence in patients with solid cancer: A cross-sectional study
Presenter: Lynn Gottmann
Session: Poster session 06