4%) and obstruction was happened in 31 cases (19.4%). Conclusion: Endoscopic insertion of SEMS shows feasibility and efficacy in patients with inoperable gastric or duodenal obstruction caused by malignancy, especially when type of stent is selected properly according
to the site of obstruction. Key Word(s): 1. self expanding metal stent (sems); 2. gastric outlet obstruction Presenting Author: SEIJI KAINO Additional Authors: SHUHEI SHINODA, MICHITAKA KAWANO, HIROFUMI HARIMA, SHIGEYUKI SUENAGA, ISAO SAKAIDA Corresponding Author: SEIJI KAINO Affiliations: Yamaguchi University Graduate School of Medicine, Yamaguchi University Graduate School of Medicine, Yamaguchi University Graduate School of Medicine, Yamaguchi University Graduate School of Medicine, Yamaguchi University Graduate School of Medicine Objective: Cancer-related pain is present in up to 33% of patients at the time of diagnosis and in 90% of patients Selleckchem Kinase Inhibitor Library with advanced disease. Celiac plexus neurolysis is performed for pain relief of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. We analyzed efficacy of
endoscopic ultrasound- (EUS-) guided neurolysis for pancreatic cancer patients in our hospital retrospectively. Methods: Between August find more 2008 and March 2014, 12 patients, 6 males and 6 females, with advanced pancreatic cancer received EUS-guided neurolysis (EUS-guided celiac ganglia neurolysis (EUS-CGN) 7 cases and EUS-guided celiac plexus neurolysis (EUS-CPN) 5 cases). We use a curved linear-array Tau-protein kinase echoendoscope, the GF-UCT240. A 22- or 25-gauge needle is used for puncture. The needle had been
previously filled with 0.5% bupivacaine. After confirming the lack of backflow of blood with aspiration, we injected the patient with absolute ethanol mixed with 10% iopamidol. The total amount of alcohol injected did not exceed 20 milliliters. Patients scored their pain according to numeric rating scale (NRS) and were interviewed one week and 2 months after the procedure. We measured the response of EUS-CGN against EUS-CPN. And we investigated the effects of the procedure with respect to the tumor size and tumor location. Results: A complete response, NRS score was less than three and the patient did not require the administration of narcotics or an increase in the dose of medications, was observed in 75.0% of the patients one week after the procedure. And 50.0% of the patients reported recurring their pain 2 months after the procedure. No statistically differences were observed between the patients treated with EUS-CGN and EUS-CPN in this study. Furthermore, we found no statistically significant differences regarding tumor size or tumor location in this study. Treatment-related side effects included severe pain immediately postprocedure in two patients. Table 1. Complete Response at One Week Complete Response at Two Months P value Procedure 0.735 CGN 5/7 (71.4%) 3/6 (50.0%) CPN 4/5 (80.0%) 2/4 (50.0%) Tumor size 1.000 <4.0 cm 3/4 (75.0%) 2/4 (50.0%) >4.0 cm 6/8 (75.0%) 3/6 (50.