Pain analysis in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: Irreversible electroporation versus radiofrequency ablation - Initial observations

Govindarajan Narayanan, Tatiana Froud, Kaming Lo, Katuska J. Barbery, Evelyn Perez-Rojas, Jose Yrizarry

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

27 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To retrospectively compare the postprocedure pain of hepatocellular carcinoma treated with irreversible electroporation (IRE) with radiofrequency ablation (RFA). Methods: This Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant, institutional review board-approved study compared postprocedure pain in 21 patients (15 men, six women; mean age 61.5 years) who underwent IRE of 29 intrahepatic lesions (mean size 2.20 cm) in 28 IRE sessions with 22 patients (16 men, six women; mean age 60.2 years) who underwent RFA of 27 lesions (mean size 3.38 cm) in 25 RFA sessions. Pain was determined by patient-disclosed scores with an 11-point numerical rating scale and 24 h cumulative hydromorphone use from patient-controlled analgesia pump. Complications were noted. Statistical significance was evaluated by Fisher's exact test, the Chi-square test, and Student's t test. Results: There was no significant difference in the cumulative hydromorphone dose (1.54 mg (IRE) vs. 1.24 mg (RFA); P = 0.52) and in the mean pain score (1.96 (IRE) vs. 2.25 (RFA); P = 0.70). In nine (32.14 %) of 28 IRE sessions and 11 (44.0 %) of 25 RFA sessions, patients reported no pain. Complications occurred in three (10.7 %) of 28 IRE treatments and included pneumothorax (n = 1), pleural effusion (n = 1), and bleeding in the form of hemothorax (n = 1); one (4 %) of 25 RFA treatments included burn. Conclusion: IRE is comparable to RFA in the amount of pain that patients experience and the amount of pain medication self-administered. Both modalities were well tolerated by patients. Prospective, randomized trials are necessary to further evaluate these findings.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)176-182
Number of pages7
JournalCardioVascular and Interventional Radiology
Volume36
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 2013

Fingerprint

Electroporation
Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Pain
Hydromorphone
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act
Hemothorax
Patient-Controlled Analgesia
Research Ethics Committees
Pneumothorax
Pleural Effusion
Chi-Square Distribution
Hemorrhage
Students
Therapeutics

Keywords

  • Irreversible electroporation
  • Pain
  • Radiofrequency ablation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Pain analysis in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma : Irreversible electroporation versus radiofrequency ablation - Initial observations. / Narayanan, Govindarajan; Froud, Tatiana; Lo, Kaming; Barbery, Katuska J.; Perez-Rojas, Evelyn; Yrizarry, Jose.

In: CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology, Vol. 36, No. 1, 01.02.2013, p. 176-182.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Narayanan, Govindarajan ; Froud, Tatiana ; Lo, Kaming ; Barbery, Katuska J. ; Perez-Rojas, Evelyn ; Yrizarry, Jose. / Pain analysis in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma : Irreversible electroporation versus radiofrequency ablation - Initial observations. In: CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology. 2013 ; Vol. 36, No. 1. pp. 176-182.
@article{2c3b63438d844ea5837ed9e3d197dd14,
title = "Pain analysis in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: Irreversible electroporation versus radiofrequency ablation - Initial observations",
abstract = "Purpose: To retrospectively compare the postprocedure pain of hepatocellular carcinoma treated with irreversible electroporation (IRE) with radiofrequency ablation (RFA). Methods: This Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant, institutional review board-approved study compared postprocedure pain in 21 patients (15 men, six women; mean age 61.5 years) who underwent IRE of 29 intrahepatic lesions (mean size 2.20 cm) in 28 IRE sessions with 22 patients (16 men, six women; mean age 60.2 years) who underwent RFA of 27 lesions (mean size 3.38 cm) in 25 RFA sessions. Pain was determined by patient-disclosed scores with an 11-point numerical rating scale and 24 h cumulative hydromorphone use from patient-controlled analgesia pump. Complications were noted. Statistical significance was evaluated by Fisher's exact test, the Chi-square test, and Student's t test. Results: There was no significant difference in the cumulative hydromorphone dose (1.54 mg (IRE) vs. 1.24 mg (RFA); P = 0.52) and in the mean pain score (1.96 (IRE) vs. 2.25 (RFA); P = 0.70). In nine (32.14 {\%}) of 28 IRE sessions and 11 (44.0 {\%}) of 25 RFA sessions, patients reported no pain. Complications occurred in three (10.7 {\%}) of 28 IRE treatments and included pneumothorax (n = 1), pleural effusion (n = 1), and bleeding in the form of hemothorax (n = 1); one (4 {\%}) of 25 RFA treatments included burn. Conclusion: IRE is comparable to RFA in the amount of pain that patients experience and the amount of pain medication self-administered. Both modalities were well tolerated by patients. Prospective, randomized trials are necessary to further evaluate these findings.",
keywords = "Irreversible electroporation, Pain, Radiofrequency ablation",
author = "Govindarajan Narayanan and Tatiana Froud and Kaming Lo and Barbery, {Katuska J.} and Evelyn Perez-Rojas and Jose Yrizarry",
year = "2013",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s00270-012-0426-9",
language = "English",
volume = "36",
pages = "176--182",
journal = "CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology",
issn = "7415-5101",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Pain analysis in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

T2 - Irreversible electroporation versus radiofrequency ablation - Initial observations

AU - Narayanan, Govindarajan

AU - Froud, Tatiana

AU - Lo, Kaming

AU - Barbery, Katuska J.

AU - Perez-Rojas, Evelyn

AU - Yrizarry, Jose

PY - 2013/2/1

Y1 - 2013/2/1

N2 - Purpose: To retrospectively compare the postprocedure pain of hepatocellular carcinoma treated with irreversible electroporation (IRE) with radiofrequency ablation (RFA). Methods: This Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant, institutional review board-approved study compared postprocedure pain in 21 patients (15 men, six women; mean age 61.5 years) who underwent IRE of 29 intrahepatic lesions (mean size 2.20 cm) in 28 IRE sessions with 22 patients (16 men, six women; mean age 60.2 years) who underwent RFA of 27 lesions (mean size 3.38 cm) in 25 RFA sessions. Pain was determined by patient-disclosed scores with an 11-point numerical rating scale and 24 h cumulative hydromorphone use from patient-controlled analgesia pump. Complications were noted. Statistical significance was evaluated by Fisher's exact test, the Chi-square test, and Student's t test. Results: There was no significant difference in the cumulative hydromorphone dose (1.54 mg (IRE) vs. 1.24 mg (RFA); P = 0.52) and in the mean pain score (1.96 (IRE) vs. 2.25 (RFA); P = 0.70). In nine (32.14 %) of 28 IRE sessions and 11 (44.0 %) of 25 RFA sessions, patients reported no pain. Complications occurred in three (10.7 %) of 28 IRE treatments and included pneumothorax (n = 1), pleural effusion (n = 1), and bleeding in the form of hemothorax (n = 1); one (4 %) of 25 RFA treatments included burn. Conclusion: IRE is comparable to RFA in the amount of pain that patients experience and the amount of pain medication self-administered. Both modalities were well tolerated by patients. Prospective, randomized trials are necessary to further evaluate these findings.

AB - Purpose: To retrospectively compare the postprocedure pain of hepatocellular carcinoma treated with irreversible electroporation (IRE) with radiofrequency ablation (RFA). Methods: This Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant, institutional review board-approved study compared postprocedure pain in 21 patients (15 men, six women; mean age 61.5 years) who underwent IRE of 29 intrahepatic lesions (mean size 2.20 cm) in 28 IRE sessions with 22 patients (16 men, six women; mean age 60.2 years) who underwent RFA of 27 lesions (mean size 3.38 cm) in 25 RFA sessions. Pain was determined by patient-disclosed scores with an 11-point numerical rating scale and 24 h cumulative hydromorphone use from patient-controlled analgesia pump. Complications were noted. Statistical significance was evaluated by Fisher's exact test, the Chi-square test, and Student's t test. Results: There was no significant difference in the cumulative hydromorphone dose (1.54 mg (IRE) vs. 1.24 mg (RFA); P = 0.52) and in the mean pain score (1.96 (IRE) vs. 2.25 (RFA); P = 0.70). In nine (32.14 %) of 28 IRE sessions and 11 (44.0 %) of 25 RFA sessions, patients reported no pain. Complications occurred in three (10.7 %) of 28 IRE treatments and included pneumothorax (n = 1), pleural effusion (n = 1), and bleeding in the form of hemothorax (n = 1); one (4 %) of 25 RFA treatments included burn. Conclusion: IRE is comparable to RFA in the amount of pain that patients experience and the amount of pain medication self-administered. Both modalities were well tolerated by patients. Prospective, randomized trials are necessary to further evaluate these findings.

KW - Irreversible electroporation

KW - Pain

KW - Radiofrequency ablation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84872680334&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84872680334&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00270-012-0426-9

DO - 10.1007/s00270-012-0426-9

M3 - Article

C2 - 22752100

AN - SCOPUS:84872680334

VL - 36

SP - 176

EP - 182

JO - CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology

JF - CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology

SN - 7415-5101

IS - 1

ER -