Literature DB >> 3174151

A double-blind comparison between epidural morphine and epidural clonidine in patients with chronic non-cancer pain.

Chris Glynn1, David Dawson, Rosemary Sanders.   

Abstract

In a randomised double-blind study of 20 patients with chronic pain, epidural morphine 5 mg in 5 ml of saline was compared with epidural clonidine 150 micrograms in 5 ml of saline. Thirteen patients had a clinical and radiological diagnosis of arachnoiditis, 6 had low back pain and 1 had post-operative scar pain. There were 18 females and 2 males with an average age of 52 years, range 22-76 years. There was no difference found between the 2 solutions in the resultant analgesia measured by the visual analogue scale for pain, pain relief or the pain word score during the 3 h period of the study. No difference was found in the patient's mood which was also measured with the visual analogue scale. Two patients had no analgesia from either injection, 2 patients did not obtain any relief from clonidine and another 2 obtained no relief from morphine. Six patients reported that clonidine was better than morphine, 5 reported that morphine and clonidine were the same and 3 reported that morphine was better than clonidine. The duration of analgesia from the clonidine varied from 6 h to 1 month; the duration of analgesia from morphine varied from 6 to 24 h. Clonidine was associated with sedation and a fall in blood pressure of greater than 20 mm Hg in all patients, 1 patient required ephedrine to treat hypotension. Twelve patients had pruritus, 7 nausea and 2 vomiting following the morphine. Statistically there was no difference found between morphine and clonidine for short-term (3 h) analgesia in these patients.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1988        PMID: 3174151     DOI: 10.1016/0304-3959(88)90157-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pain        ISSN: 0304-3959            Impact factor:   6.961


  17 in total

Review 1.  The need for caution in interpreting high quality systematic reviews.

Authors:  K Hopayian
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-09-22

Review 2.  Outcome of invasive treatment modalities on back pain and sciatica: an evidence-based review.

Authors:  Maurits W van Tulder; Bart Koes; Seppo Seitsalo; Antti Malmivaara
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-12-01       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 3.  Strategies for the treatment of cancer pain in the new millennium.

Authors:  C Ripamonti; E D Dickerson
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 4.  The pharmacotherapy of chronic pain: a review.

Authors:  Mary E Lynch; C Peter N Watson
Journal:  Pain Res Manag       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 3.037

5.  [Not Available].

Authors:  M Tryba
Journal:  Schmerz       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 1.107

6.  [Not Available].

Authors:  M Zenz
Journal:  Schmerz       Date:  1991-03       Impact factor: 1.107

7.  [AIDS and pain management-a survey of German AIDS and pain management units.].

Authors:  D Zech; L Radbruch; S Grond; W Heise
Journal:  Schmerz       Date:  1994-06       Impact factor: 1.107

8.  [Prevalence and characteristics of neuropathic pain in malignant disease.].

Authors:  S Grond; D Zech; T Meuser; L Radbruch; M Kasper; K A Lehmann
Journal:  Schmerz       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 1.107

9.  [High-dose intrathecal clonidine in the treatment of neuropathic tumor pain. Two case reports.].

Authors:  D Zech; R Sabatowski; L Badbruch; S Grond
Journal:  Schmerz       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 1.107

10.  [Intrathecal and epidural administration of non-opioid analgesics in acute and chronic pain treatment.].

Authors:  B Donner; M Tryba; M Zenz; M Strumpf
Journal:  Schmerz       Date:  1994-06       Impact factor: 1.107

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.