Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42093845›Full record

ArticleJournal of pain research2026

Retrograde Intrathecal Catheter Placement at L5/S1 for Sacropelvic Cancer Pain: A Pilot Feasibility Study.

James S Cho, Julia Zhu, Pritesh Topiwala, David Hao

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pain research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

James S ChoDepartment of Anesthesiology, Mass General Brigham, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3147-2356
Julia ZhuHarvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID 0009-0000-9956-6028
Pritesh TopiwalaDepartment of Anesthesiology, Mass General Brigham, Boston, MA, USA.
David HaoDepartment of Anesthesiology, Mass General Brigham, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0221-9255

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Intrathecal drug delivery systems have a role in treating cancer pain. For patients with predominant sacropelvic pain, caudally directed retrograde catheter placement targeting L5/S1 represents an alternative strategy that has been less well described. Objective: This pilot study evaluated outcomes associated with retrograde intrathecal catheter placement in patients with refractory sacropelvic cancer pain, with a primary focus on systemic opioid reduction and discharge facilitation. Methods: This pilot retrospective, pre-post cohort study was conducted at two academic medical centers between January 2021 and September 2024. Seven patients with cancer-related sacropelvic pain who received a caudally directed (retrograde) intrathecal catheter with tip positioning at L5/S1 were included. Pre-intervention data, including pain scores and daily oral plus intravenous opioid requirement, were collected and compared (two-tailed paired Results: Systemic (oral plus intravenous) opioid use decreased substantially from a pre-intervention mean of 731.8 ± 515.8 mg oral morphine equivalents (OME) in the 24 hours prior to intrathecal delivery system placement to 195.9 ± 93.4 mg in the 24 hours prior to discharge (t = 3.112, Conclusion: In this small retrospective pilot cohort, retrograde L5/S1 intrathecal catheter placement was associated with substantial systemic opioid reduction and discharge facilitation. Findings are exploratory and hypothesis-generating; prospective comparative studies are needed.

Indexed as

cancer painintrathecal drug deliveryopioid reductionpain managementpalliative care

Identifiers

PMID42093845
PMCPMC13138881

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.