[The anterior sonographic-guided celiac plexus blockade. Review and personal observations]

Abstract

The coeliac plexus block is an approved method for the relief of upper abdominal pain due to cancer of the upper intra-abdominal viscera or to chronic pancreatitis. While there are many reports concerning the posterior approach to the coeliac plexus block, little attention has been given the anterior approach. There are two ways of implementing the anterior approach to the coeliac plexus: CT-guided and the ultrasound guided approach. METHODS. The ultrasonic-guided anterior approach to the coeliac plexus block is used with the patient in the supine position. The aorta and discharge of the truncus coeliacus or the a. lienalis respectively, are ultrasonographically presented at two levels. After setting local cutaneous and subcutaneous anaesthesia, a 15-cm-long 25 G-needle is introduced into the epigastrium. The point of the needle is--ultrasonographically guided--inserted into the pre-aortic area near the discharge of the truncus coeliacus. The position of the needle point is ultrasonographically controlled on two levels. For the enforcement of a diagnostic coeliac plexus block after careful aspiration on two levels, 10 ml of bupivacaine 0.5% is injected. The spread of the solution is evaluated by ultrasound. If the needle position is correct; a few minutes later the patient has a feeling of warmth in the upper abdominal region. For the enforcement of a neurolytic coeliac plexus block 10 ml ethanol 96% and 10 ml prilocaine 1% can be administered. The two solutions are applied as small volumes in permanent succession. Thus the burning pain, which is often observed after the injection of alcohol, is avoided. RESULTS. In the literature there are only a few reports, about the results and side-effects after use of the anterior approach in the coeliac plexus block. The results of these investigations and our own show total pain relief or at least good pain reduction by at best 85%. The reduction in pain achieved continues in as many as 60% of the treated patients. There is the possibility to stop or at least reduce the analgesic premedication. These results are comparable with those after using the posterior approach to the coeliac plexus block. When carrying out the anterior approach in the coeliac plexus block, most of the patients showed increased intestinal motility. Therefore, about 60% of all patients had transitory diarrhoea. In 12-25% of the patients orthostatic hypotension was observed. This side-effect is avoided by an appropriate infusion before enforcement of the block. In a frequency of 4-100% the occurrence of burning pain was reported during injection of the alcohol. No serious side-effects were observed. CONCLUSIONS. The results concerning total pain relief or at least pain reduction are comparable to the posterior approach for the block. Nevertheless, there are some advantages to the ultrasound-guided anterior approach. There is less risk using this technique. No methodological complications have been observed so far. There is no risk of neurological complications such as paraplegia. Because the patients remain in the supine position, the anterior approach to the coeliac plexus block is suitable for terminally ill patients, who are not able to tolerate the prone position and need careful supervision and good ventilation. Also, no contrast medium is necessary. Only a small volume of local anaesthetics or alcohol is required. We prefer the anterior approach of the coeliac plexus block as a fast, safe and cost-effective method, which should receive increasing attention during the next few years.