Clinical experience of long-term treatment with epidural and intrathecal opioids--a nationwide survey.

Department of Anaesthesia, Karolinska Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica (Impact Factor: 2.31). 05/1988; 32(3):253-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.1988.tb02725.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Long-term use of spinal opioids to treat chronic severe pain is widely established. However, the indications, shortcomings and complications of the method have not been completely described. Experience with spinal opioids was analysed for the period 1979-1984 in a nationwide Swedish survey. Out of 93 anaesthesia departments, 69 used the method. Approximately 750 patients were treated with epidural morphine for an average duration of 124 days (3-450). Eighteen patients were treated with intrathecal morphine for an average period for 47 days (3-90). The intrathecal approach was used in all clinics because of failure of the epidural route. In only one department was the intrathecal approach used as the primary route of therapy, depending on the mechanism of pain. The highest daily morphine dose was 480 mg and 50 mg for epidural and intrathecal routes, respectively. The patients given the highest dosages were not necessarily those subjected to the longest treatment. The need for increased dosage seems to be related not only to changes in receptor sensitivity but also to changes in pain mechanisms. No case of threatening ventilatory depression was reported. Thirty-two departments had treated a few patients with chronic non-cancer pain conditions. Initial results were considered "excellent" in 11 departments, but at follow-up results were excellent in only one department. In addition to dislocation, occlusion of the catheters or leakage, injection pain was an obstacle to successful treatment. Pruritus urinary retention, and local infections were not reported as significant problems, but one case of meningitis was reported.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Adrenomedullin (AM) belongs to a calcitonin gene related peptide (CGRP) family and has been demonstrated to recruit CGRP following chronic use of morphine and neuronal nitric oxide synthase (nNOS) in inflammation. The present study investigated the possibility that AM initiates the changes of other molecules contributing to the development of morphine tolerance in its chronic use. Intrathecal (i.t.) co-administration of the AM receptor antagonist AM22-52 (35.8 μg) inhibited tolerance to morphine-induced analgesia while daily injection of the AM receptor agonist AM1-50 (8 μg, i.t., bolus) for 9 days induced a decrease in the potency of morphine analgesia and thermal hyperalgesia. Persistent exposure of cultured dorsal root ganglion (DRG) explants to morphine (3.3 μM) for 4 days resulted in an increase in AM and CGRP mRNA levels. However, morphine failed to produce these effects in the presence of AM22-52 (2 μM). The i.t. administration of morphine for 6 days increased the expression of nNOS in spinal dorsal horn and DRG neurons but decreased expression of the endogenous opioid peptide bovine adrenal medulla 22 (BAM22) in small- and medium-sized neurons in DRG. Particularly, the co-administration of AM22-52 (35.8 μg) inhibited the morphine-induced alterations in nNOS and BAM22. These results indicated that the increase in nNOS and CGRP expressions and the decrease in BAM22 were attributed to the increased AM receptor signaling induced by chronic morphine. The present study supports the hypothesis that the enhancement of AM bioactivity triggered upregulation of pronociceptive mediators and downregulation of pain-inhibiting molecule in a cascade contributing to the development of morphine tolerance.
    Neuroscience 09/2014; · 3.33 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Identifying effective treatment for patients with intract- able pain is a challenge. Neuromodulation controls pain, improves quality of life and functional status, and reduces healthcare expenditures. Due to space con- straints, we will restrict our discussion to spinal cord stimulation (SCS), intrathecal drug therapy (IDT), and deep brain stimulation (DBS). In contrast to ablative procedures, neuromodulation is completely reversible and utilizes implantable devices that employ electricity or chemical agents that inhibit, excite, or modulate activity of neuronal groups and networks in order to achieve therapeutic effect.
    Neuropathic Pain: Causes, Management, and Understanding, Edited by Cory Toth, Dwight Moulin, 01/2014: chapter Spinal cord stimulation and other neuromodulation: pages 273-289; Cambridge University Press., ISBN: 9781107023710
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Opioide sind Mittel der ersten Wahl in der Therapie mittelschwerer bis starker akuter und chronischer Schmerzzustände. Allerdings können Opioide auch zu einer Schmerzverstärkung führen, die auf einer Aktivierung pronozizeptiver Systeme beruht. Es konnte gezeigt werden, dass neben einer akute Rezeptordesensibilisierung und einer Hochregulation der Adenylylzyklaseaktivität insbesondere die Aktivierung des N-Methyl-D-Aspartat- (NMDA-)Rezeptor-Systems und die deszendierende Fazilitierung den antinozizeptiven Eigenschaften des Opioids entgegengerichtet sind. So können schon nach kurzzeitiger Anwendung Sensibilisierungsprozesse induziert werden, die einen Teil der analgetischen Wirkung des Opioids maskieren und noch viele Tage nach dem Absetzen nachweisbar sein können. Klinische Relevanz erhalten diese Befunde aus Studien, in denen nach der intraoperativen Anwendung hoher Dosen von -Agonisten vermehrte Schmerzen und ein erhöhter postoperativer Schmerzmittelverbrauch beobachtet wurde. Weiterhin werden nach länger dauernder Anwendung von -Agonisten oftmals neben einem ansteigenden Bedarf an Schmerzmitteln paradoxe Schmerzzustände beobachtet. Durch eine Kombination der Opioide mit Substanzen anderer Klassen, wie NMDA-Rezeptor-Antagonisten, α2-Agonisten oder nichtsteroidalen antiinflammatorischen Analgetika (NSAIDs), durch Opioidrotationen oder Kombinationen von Opioiden mit unterschiedlicher Rezeptorselektivität können diese Sensibilisierungsprozesse unterdrückt und die Schmerztherapie optimiert werden.
    Der Anaesthesist 01/2004; 53(5). · 0.74 Impact Factor