Effectiveness of the superior hypogastric plexus neurolytic block in the management of pelvic abdominal pain in adult patients diagnosed with cancer: A systematic literature review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Severe oncological pain occurs in up to 60% of pelvic abdominal cáncer patients, being refractory to medical management in up to 30% of cases. In 1990, the superior hypogastric plexus neurolytic block (SHPB) was described for the control of pain in these patients. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of this technique for the control of oncological pain. Methodology: Studies that evaluated the effectiveness of the SHPB using the classic or transdiscal approach in adult patients with oncological abdominal-pelvic pain were systematically reviewed. A search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE and Scopus from January 1, 1990, to August 31, 2019, without a language restriction. The visual analog scale (VAS), morphine milligram equivalents (MME) per day, quality of life and presence of complications were recorded. The quality of the studies was evaluated using the Jadad and Ottawa-Newcastle scales. Results: Eight studies met the inclusión criteria: 6 were descriptivo longitudinal studies, and 2 were controlled clinical trials, comprising 316 patients (75% female and 25% male; average age 53.2 years); the most frequent diagnoses were gynecological (65%) cancer. An average VAS reduction of 55%-60.8% was obtained as well as a MME reduction of 40%-60%. Three studies evaluated the quality of life using the (QLQ-C30), (PSS) and Zubrod scale all with positive results. Complications were reported in 18% of cases, pain related to the puncture was the most frequent. Conclusions: The SHPB may be an effective for the control of severe oncological abdominal-pelvic pain, decreasing the VAS and MME and improving the quality of life of patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".