Pain versus analgesia: TAOK3 as a pharmacogene.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Cook-Sather SD
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5533294 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND:This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 4, 2006. Patients may control postoperative pain by self administration of intravenous opioids using devices designed for this purpose (patient controlled analgesia or PCA). A 1992 meta-analysis by Ballantyne et al found a strong patient preference for PCA over non-patient controlled analgesia, but disclosed no differences in analgesic consumption or length of postoperative hospital stay. Although Ballantyne's meta-analysis found that PCA did have a small but statistically significant benefit upon pain intensity, a 2001 review by Walder et al did not find statistically significant differences in pain intensity or pain relief between PCA and groups treated with non-patient controlled analgesia. OBJECTIVES:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of patient controlled intravenous opioid analgesia (termed PCA in this review) versus non-patient controlled opioid analgesia of as-needed opioid analgesia for postoperative pain relief. SEARCH METHODS:We ran the search for the previous review in November 2004. For this update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2014, Issue 12), MEDLINE (1966 to 28 January 2015), and EMBASE (1980 to 28 January 2015) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in any language, and reference lists of reviews and retrieved articles. SELECTION CRITERIA:We selected RCTs that assessed pain intensity as a primary or secondary outcome. These studies compared PCA without a continuous background infusion with non-patient controlled opioid analgesic regimens. We excluded studies that explicitly stated they involved patients with chronic pain. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:Two review authors independently extracted data, which included demographic variables, type of surgery, interventions, efficacy, and adverse events. We graded each included study for methodological quality by assessing risk of bias and employed the GRADE approach to assess the overall quality of the evidence. We performed meta-analysis of outcomes that included pain intensity assessed by a 0 to 100 visual analog scale (VAS), opioid consumption, patient satisfaction, length of stay, and adverse events. MAIN RESULTS:Forty-nine studies with 1725 participants receiving PCA and 1687 participants assigned to a control group met the inclusion criteria. The original review included 55 studies with 2023 patients receiving PCA and 1838 patients assigned to a control group. There were fewer included studies in our updated review due to the revised exclusion criteria. For the primary outcome, participants receiving PCA had lower VAS pain intensity scores versus non-patient controlled analgesia over most time intervals, e.g., scores over 0 to 24 hours were nine points lower (95% confidence interval (CI) -13 to -5, moderate quality evidence) and over 0 to 48 hours were 10 points lower (95% CI -12 to -7, low quality evidence). Among the secondary outcomes, participants were more satisfied with PCA (81% versus 61%, P value = 0.002) and consumed higher amounts of opioids than controls (0 to 24 hours, 7 mg more of intravenous morphine equivalents, 95% CI 1 mg to 13 mg). Those receiving PCA had a higher incidence of pruritus (15% versus 8%, P value = 0.01) but had a similar incidence of other adverse events. There was no difference in the length of hospital stay. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:Since the last version of this review, we have found new studies providing additional information. We reanalyzed the data but the results did not substantially alter any of our previously published conclusions. This review provides moderate to low quality evidence that PCA is an efficacious alternative to non-patient controlled systemic analgesia for postoperative pain control.
| S-EPMC7387354 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6478102 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPotential methods for objective assessment of postoperative pain include the Analgesia Nociception Index™ (ANI), a real-time index of the parasympathetic tone, the pupillary light reflex (PLR), and the variation coefficient of pupillary diameter (VCPD), a measure of pupillary diameter (PD) fluctuations. Until now, the literature is divided as to their respective accuracy magnitudes for assessing a patient's pain. The VCPD has been demonstrated to strongly correlate with pain in an obstetrical population. However, the pain induced by obstetrical labour is different, given its intermittent nature, than the pain observed during the postoperative period. The aim of the current study was to compare the respective values of these variables at VAS scores ≥4.MethodsAfter approval by the Ethics Committee, 345 patients aged on average 50 (SD 17) yr (range: 18-91 yr) of age were included. The protocols of general anaesthesia and postoperative analgesia were left to the anaesthetist's discretion. Some 40 min after tracheal intubation, VAS, ANI, PD, PLR, and VCPD values were recorded.ResultsVCPD correlates more strongly (r=0.78) with pain as assessed with the VAS than ANI (r=-0.15). PD and PLR are not statistically correlated with VAS. The ability of VCPD to assess the pain of patients (VAS≥4) is strong [area under the curve (AUC): 0.92, confidence interval (CI): 0.89-0.95], and better than for ANI (AUC: 0.39, CI: 0.33-0.45).ConclusionsOur study suggests that VCPD could be a useful tool for monitoring pain in conscious patients during the postoperative period.Clinical trial registrationNCT03267979.
| S-EPMC6676014 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There is controversy regarding the benefits and risks of combined spinal-epidural compared with epidural analgesia (CSE, EPID) for labor analgesia. We hypothesized that CSE would result in fewer patient requests for top-up doses compared to EPID.One-hundred ASA physical status I or II parous women at term in early labor (<5 cm cervical dilation) requesting analgesia were randomized in double-blind fashion to the EPID group (epidural bupivacaine 2.5 mg/mL, 3 mL, followed by bupivacaine 1.25 mg/mL, 10 mL with fentanyl 50 microg) or the CSE group (intrathecal bupivacaine 2.5 mg with fentanyl 25 microg). Both groups received identical infusions of bupivacaine 0.625 mg/mL with fentanyl 2 microg/mL at 12 mL/h. The primary outcome variable was the number of top-up doses requested to treat breakthrough pain.There was no significant difference between the two groups in the percentage of patients requesting top-up doses (44% CSE vs 51% EPID; 95% confidence interval of the difference -28% to +14%) nor in the need for multiple top-up doses (14% CSE vs 15% EPID). Visual analog scale scores were lower in the CSE group compared to the EPID group at 10 min after initiation of analgesia [median 0 cm (0, 0) vs 4 cm (1, 6) respectively, P < 0.001] and at 30 min [0 cm (0, 0) vs 0 cm (0, 1), respectively, P = 0.03].We did not find a difference in the need for top-up doses in parous patients; however, CSE provided better analgesia in the first 30 min compared to EPID.
| S-EPMC2670780 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6080861 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6377212 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo compare the efficacy of fixed-time-interval oral analgesia and spinal-morphine for management of post-Cesarean pain.MethodsIn this open-label, parallel-group, randomized, controlled trial, 200 women due to undergo elective Caesarean section with spinal anaesthesia were enrolled between July 2015 and April 2016. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either spinal fentanyl followed by oral doses of tramadol, paracetamol, and diclofenac at predetermined regular intervals of 6 h for the first 48 h, and rescue treatment with percocet (oxycodone and paracetamol; oral analgesia group), or spinal morphine and rescue treatment with oral tramadol, paracetamol, and diclofenac (spinal-morphine group). The primary outcomes were pain intensity during the postoperative 48 h, measured on a 10-point numeric rating scale (NRS) and expressed as area under the curve (AUC), and the number of breakthrough events of moderate to severe pain (defined as NRS score ≥ 4).ResultsThe oral analgesia group compared to the spinal-morphine group had similar mean pain intensity (AUC (120 ± 35 versus 121 ± 31, respectively; p = 0.8) but more events of moderate-to-severe breakthrough pain (4.8 ± 2 versus 3.8 ± 1.7, respectively; p = 0.0002). Higher rates and longer durations of pruritus, nausea, and vomiting were reported among patients receiving spinal morphine, as compared with oral analgesia. Satisfaction scores were high in both groups (8.2 ± 2.4 versus 8.7 ± 1.8 in the oral analgesia and spinal morphine, respectively; p = 0.23).ConclusionsBoth oral analgesia at fixed time intervals and spinal morphine are satisfactory methods for treating post-Caesarean pain.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02440399, date of registration: 07/05/ 2015. URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02440399?term=enav+yefet&rank=7 .
| S-EPMC8406016 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Loss of function mutations in the SCN9a gene encoding voltage-gated sodium channel Nav1.7 cause congenital insensitivity to pain (CIP) and anosmia in otherwise normal humans and mice, suggesting that this channel may be a good analgesic drug target. Surprisingly, potent selective antagonists of Nav1.7 are weak analgesics. We therefore investigated whether Nav1.7 , as well as contributing to electrical signalling may have an additional function. Here we report that Nav1.7 deletion has profound effects on the sensory neuron transcriptome, leading to dysregulation of a number of transcription factors as well as upregulation of enkephalin precursor PENK mRNA and down regulation of CEACAM10 mRNA, a protein involved in noxious thermosensation. PENK mRNA is transcriptionally upregulated in Nav1.7 null mutant female sensory neurons, resulting in increased enkephalin expression in the dorsal horn of the spinal cord. PENK expression is down-regulated by addition of the sodium ionophore monensin, suggesting that sodium may play a role as a second messenger. Application of the opioid antagonist naloxone strongly enhances noxious peripheral input into the spinal cord, and dramatically reduces analgesia in both male and female Nav1.7 null mutant mice, as well as in human Nav1.7 null mutants. These data show that loss of Nav1.7 expression increases opioid drive over the lifetime of mice and humans. They further suggest that Nav1.7 channel blockers alone may not replicate the phenotype of null mutant humans and mice, but should be potentiated with exogenous opioids. RNA was extracted from Dorsal Root Ganglia tissue from Nav1.7 Knock-Out, Nav1.8 KO and Nav1.9 KO mice (n = 3) and hybridised on Affymetrix Mouse Genome 430 2.0 Array (GPL1261)
2014-09-13 | E-GEOD-61373 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:Postoperative pain relief in 40 children undergoing elective infraumbilical surgery was assessed after caudal epidural adminstration of either lignocaine or bupivacaine in the doses of 0.5 mL/kg body weight of a 1 per cent solution and 0.5 mL/kg body weight of a 0.25 per cent solution respectively. Pain free period was assessed by subjective pain scales. The pain free period was significantly prolonged in children who were given bupivacaine (14.75 ± 2.75 hours) as compared to lignocaine (7.25 ± 3.25 hours).
| S-EPMC5530789 | biostudies-other
Project description:Interindividual variability in pain sensitivity and the response to analgesic manipulations remains a considerable clinical challenge as well as an area of intense scientific investigation. Techniques in this field have matured rapidly so that much relevant data have emerged only in the past few years. Our increasing understanding of the genetic mediation of these biological phenomena have nonetheless revealed their surprising complexity. This review provides a comprehensive picture and critical analysis of the field and its prospects.
| S-EPMC2730377 | biostudies-literature