No abstract

Until now, there have not been any parameters to monitor opioid therapy in cancer patients with pain. In this study, 325 consecutive advanced cancer patients were scheduled for a prospective longitudinal survey. After exclusions, 67 patients were surveyed. All included patients were advanced cancer patients with pain that required opioid therapy for more than 6 weeks before death. Opioid escalation, symptoms associated with opioid therapy, pain mechanism, and pain intensity were recorded. Indices were calculated to categorize the response to opioids. The opioid escalation index (OEI) was used to index the mean increase of the starting opioid dosage, expressed as a percentage or in mg. The length of the period of stable dose (MLD) and the effective analgesic score (EAS), that is, the analgesic consumption/pain relief ratio calculated at fixed intervals, were also used. Patients with a mean visual analogue scale score (VAS) of less than 4 and regular OEI and EAS were considered responsive; patients with a mean VAS less than 4 but with an OEI more than 5 or increases of more than 100% of EAS when compared to that calculated the week before were considered mildly responsive; and patients with a mean VAS more than 4 were considered unresponsive. Advanced age, female gender, and previous chemotherapy were all factors reducing OEI. Head and neck cancer was associated with a higher OEI. Regarding the influence of the opioid-related symptoms, an increased OEI was associated with the presence of confusion. Moreover the presence of confusion was associated with neuropathic pain. Neuropathic pain taken alone, however, did not influence this score. Gender-specific cancer, such as breast cancer, influenced the gender differences reported for MLD (significantly longer than that reported for males and other primary tumor). Good responsiveness was observed in 28 patients, partial responsiveness in 33 patients, unresponsiveness in six patients. Psychological factors were associated with poor pain relief, probably reducing the patient's compliance. The tools used in this study may be useful in monitoring the effects of opioid therapy in cancer pain patients. Simple numbers are easy to compare and make it possible to profile opioid responsiveness and differences among patients.

Analgesic response, incidental pain and pain mechanism were evaluated in order to predict the chances of pain relief in advanced cancer patients. In an observation period of about 2 months, 130 patients were followed at home until death using only a pharmacological approach to control pain according to the WHO ladders. Ninety-eight patients were considered. Pain relief was considered good if less than moderate. Pain was assessed during the course of examinations (2-3 a week) by independent observers. If other techniques were needed the result was considered negative. The patients were tested with an NSAID (Diclofenac) and assigned to group 1 if the pain became slight in 3 days. If the response was negative, a 4-day trial with opioids was started. If the pain was slight the patient was included in group 3, otherwise in group 5. Every patient belonging to these groups but with incidentical pain was included in groups 2, 4 and 6, respectively. For each group a subdivision was made according to the pain characteristics. There was a progressive worsening in pain relief in groups 4, 5 and 6, suggesting a good correlation between response to the drugs and future chances of pain control in a period of 2 months. This study demonstrates that incidental pain reduces the possibility of pain control (50%) with the exclusive administration of analgesics in patients with a mean life expectation of about 2 months. This negative influence is counterbalanced by the possible individual response to analgesics administered sequentially during a 1-week period (85.8% good pain relief with NSAID, 74% with opioids).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

No abstract

Epiploic appendagitis is a rare cause of acute abdominal pain, determined by a benign self-limiting inflammation of the epiploic appendages. It may manifest with heterogeneous clinical presentations, mimicking other more severe entities responsible of acute abdominal pain, such as acute diverticulitis or appendicitis. Given its importance as clinical mimicker, imaging plays a crucial role to avoid inaccurate diagnosis that may lead to unnecessary hospitalization, antibiotic therapy, and surgery. CT represents the gold standard technique for the evaluation of patients with indeterminate acute abdominal pain. Imaging findings include the presence of an oval lesion with fat-attenuation surrounded by a thin hyperdense rim on CT (“hyperattenuating ring sign”) abutting anteriorly the large bowel, usually associated with inflammation of the adjacent mesentery. A central high-attenuation focus within the fatty lesion (“central dot sign”) can sometimes be observed and is indicative of a central thrombosed vein within the inflamed epiploic appendage. Rarely, epiploic appendagitis may be located within a hernia sac or attached to the vermiform appendix. Chronically infarcted epiploic appendage may detach, appearing as an intraperitoneal loose calcified body in the abdominal cavity. In this review, we aim to provide an overview of the clinical presentation and key imaging features that may help the radiologist to make an accurate diagnosis and guide the clinical management of those patients.