ReviewWiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946)2008
[Opioid-induced bowel dysfunction: a literature analysis on pathophysiology and treatment].
Review in Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946), 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Managing Chronic Non-Malignant Pain in the Elderly: Intrathecal Therapy.Drugs & aging · 2019Review
- Review
- [Methylnaltrexone. A new approach for therapy of opioid-induced obstipation].Schmerz (Berlin, Germany) · 2009Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bowel dysfunction is a frequent and serious side effect of opioid analgetics. In spite of its common occurrence, in the course of clinical routine, it is frequently ignored or underestimated. Authors of the analysed literature widely agree that a prophylactic and routine pharmacotherapy is necessary. For this purpose, laxatives, enemas and suppositories, prokinetic agents and opioid antagonists can be considered. Bulk-forming laxatives did not prove to be effective, since the quantity of fluid intake required for the action usually cannot be provided. Furthermore, the benefit of emollient agents is doubted. As a monotherapy they are not sufficient. By contrast, stimulant and osmotic laxatives proved to be active. Prokinetic drugs are not recommended because of their serious side effects. Effective abatement of opioid-induced obstipation by opioid antagonists has been proven in numerous studies. However, the loss of analgesia and opioid withdrawal symptoms were described as adverse effects. Development of quaternary opioid antagonists such as methylnaltrexone was allowed for mitigating these adverse effects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.