Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21182491›Full record

Trial reportBritish journal of pharmacology2011

Effect of transdermal opioids in experimentally induced superficial, deep and hyperalgesic pain.

T Andresen, C Staahl, A Oksche, H Mansikka, L Arendt-Nielsen, A M Drewes

Open access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in British journal of pharmacology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. The Impact of Opioid Treatment on Regional Gastrointestinal Transit.Journal of neurogastroenterology and motility · 2016
    Article
  11. Ultraviolet Radiation on the Skin: A Painful Experience?CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2016
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
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

6 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

T AndresenMech-Sense, Department of Gastroenterology, Aalborg Hospital, Aarhus University, Denmark.
C Staahl
A Oksche
H Mansikka
L Arendt-Nielsen
A M Drewes
Aalborg University · DKAalborg University Hospital · DKMech-Sense · DKMundipharma (Germany) · DEUniversity of Giessen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeChronic pain and hyperalgesia can be difficult to treat with classical opioids acting predominately at the µ-opioid receptor. Buprenorphine and its active metabolite are believed to act through µ-, κ- and δ-receptors and may therefore possess different analgesic and anti-hyperalgesic effects compared with pure µ-receptor agonists, for example, fentanyl. Here, we have compared the analgesic and anti-hyperalgesic effects of buprenorphine and fentanyl. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH: Twenty-two healthy volunteers were randomized to treatment with transdermal buprenorphine (20 µg·h(-1), 144 h), fentanyl (25 µg·h(-1), 72 h) or placebo patches in a double-blind, cross-over experimental pain study. The experimental pain tests (phasic pain, sensitization) involved pressure at the tibial bone, cutaneous electrical and thermal stimulation, intramuscular nerve growth factor, UVB light burn injury model and intradermal capsaicin-induced hyperalgesia. Pain testing was carried out at baseline, 24, 48, 72 and 144 h after application of the drugs. KEY

resultsCompared with placebo, buprenorphine, but not fentanyl, significantly attenuated pressure at the tibial bone as well as pressure pain in the primary hyperalgesic area induced by UVB light The two drugs were equipotent and better than placebo against cutaneous thermal pain stimulation), but failed to show significant analgesic effect to cutaneous electrical stimulation, nerve growth factor-induced muscle soreness and to capsaicin-induced hyperalgesia. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Buprenorphine, but not fentanyl, showed analgesic effects against experimentally induced, bone-associated pain and primary hyperalgesia compared with placebo. These tissue- and modality-differentiated properties may reflect the variable effects of opioid drugs observed in individual patients.

Indexed as

Administration, CutaneousAnalgesicsAnalgesics, OpioidBuprenorphineCapsaicinCross-Over StudiesDouble-Blind MethodElectric StimulationFentanylHumansHyperalgesiaMaleNerve Growth FactorPainPain MeasurementSkinAnalgesicsAnalgesics, OpioidBuprenorphineCapsaicinFentanylNerve Growth Factor

Identifiers

PMID21182491
PMCPMC3195916
OpenAlexW1935733657

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.