An interventional study of Double needle celiac neurolysis (DNCN) and Single needle celiac neurolysis (SNCN) in Upper Abdominal Malignancy, sponsored by Mansoura University. Completed at 1 site in Egypt. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2016-02-26.
Sponsored by Mansoura University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Supportive care
Computerized tomography-guided Celiac plexus neurolysis has become a popular technique. As, it has Cross-section imaging system to avoids anatomic structures injury, it has high density resolution that clearly display the retro-peritoneal anatomic structures ,it allow an optimal puncture site selection and measured the angle and depth of the needle insertion accurately with display the range of the neurolytic agent diffusion
The aim of this study was to evaluate analgesic efficacy of a computerized tomography guided left lateral antero-crural approach near the origin of celiac trunk with patients position on their right side immediately after the procedure using a single needle injection technique for upper abdominal malignancy compared with the classic 2 needle posterior antero-crural injection technique and possible complications.
All patients will take thin computerized tomography section in the axial plane to detect the site of celiac plexus and coronal plane for correct site for needle placement.
Computerized tomography slices thickness will be from 3 mm at 5mm interval through all the abdominal and lower thoracic area. The celiac and superior mesenteric arteries will be identified after contrast injection.
When an ideal needle position and tip were confirmed, the stylet was removed and aspiration was performed to ensure that there was no blood is withdrawn.
A volume of 3 ml of lidocaine mixed with contrast was injected to confirm the position, after injection another cut has been taken to show the spread of contrast freely in the retro-peritoneal space around the celiac plexus and the aorta. After confirmation, that contrast was injected to surround the artery and make sure that there was no dorsal spread to avoid injury to somatic nerves. Also to make sure that there was no spread to the renal pelvis , injection of phenol 10% mixed with contrast through needle
Mansoura University is the lead sponsor of 1,115 studies on the registry; 184 are open to participants now.
Of its 9 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 0 (0%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Patients were subjected to CT guided celiac neurolysis using 2 needle antero-crural technique on each side with patient in prone position and both needles will be lateral to the aorta
Device: Double needle celiac neurolysis (DNCN)
Patients were subjected to CT guided celiac neurolysis using a single needle antero-crural approach from left side to be just in the front of the aorta near the origin of celiac trunk with patient in lateral position with his left side up then after the injection the patient were kept to his right side up for more homogenous spread of the dye.
Device: Single needle celiac neurolysis (SNCN)
CT guided celiac neurolysis will be performed using 2 needles inserted on each sides of aorta where patient was positioned in prone position
CT guided celiac neurolysis will be performed through advancing a single needle to justfront of the aorta near the origin of celiac trunk where patient placed in lateral position
Failure rate of patients positioning
Positioning failure means failure to put patient in prone or lateral position
Time frame: For 5 min before needle insertion
Time to achieve analgesia
Time to achieve pain score less than 3
Time frame: for one hour after performing the procedure
Failure of block
Failure of block is defined as patient having pain visual analogue scale greater than 3
Time frame: For 1 week after performing the procedure
Plan to share: Undecided
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
The record gives a start of Jun 2015, a primary completion of Dec 2015 and a completion of Dec 2015. It does not say whether these dates are actual or estimated.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
This study is completed, as verified in Feb 2016. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.