Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22798528›Full record

ReviewAnesthesia and analgesia2012

Neuraxial analgesia in neonates and infants: a review of clinical and preclinical strategies for the development of safety and efficacy data.

Suellen M Walker, Tony L Yaksh

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Anesthesia and analgesia, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03117140 (A Prospective Triple-masked Randomized Controlled Trial Measuring Analgesia Duration of Dexamethasone, Buprenorphine, or Clonidine With Ropivacaine for Interscalene Nerve Block), which is not on this map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
10.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT03117140 phase4completednot on this mapstarted 2013, after this paper: background citation

A Prospective Triple-masked Randomized Controlled Trial Measuring Analgesia Duration of Dexamethasone, Buprenorphine, or Clonidine With Ropivacaine for Interscalene Nerve Block

TypeinterventionalSponsorMelinda SeeringRan2013 to 2017Enrolled160ConditionsAnesthesia, LocalArmsRopivacaine 0.75%, Ropivacaine 0.75% + 300 mcg Buprenorphine, Ropivacaine 0.75% + 75 mcg clonidine, Ropivacaine 0.75% + 8 mg dexamethasone
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 108 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Frontiers in Pain Research: A Scope of Its Focus and Content.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2020
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Selective inhibition of CaScience signaling · 2018
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Pain after surgery in children: clinical recommendations.Current opinion in anaesthesiology · 2015
    Review
  20. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Suellen M WalkerPortex Unit: Pain Research, UCL Institute of Child Health and Great Ormond Street Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK. suellen.walker@ucl.ac.uk
Tony L Yaksh
University College London · GBUniversity of California, San Diego · US

Funding

Characterization of Toxicity with Spinal OpiatesR01DA015353 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI YAKSH, TONY L. · 2003 to 2017
$4.4M
NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA015353PHS HHS 15353
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neuraxial drugs provide robust pain control, have the potential to improve outcomes, and are an important component of the perioperative care of children. Opioids or clonidine improves analgesia when added to perioperative epidural infusions; analgesia is significantly prolonged by the addition of clonidine, ketamine, neostigmine, or tramadol to single-shot caudal injections of local anesthetic; and neonatal intrathecal anesthesia/analgesia is increasing in some centers. However, it is difficult to determine the relative risk-benefit of different techniques and drugs without detailed and sensitive data related to analgesia requirements, side effects, and follow-up. Current data related to benefits and complications in neonates and infants are summarized, but variability in current neuraxial drug use reflects the relative lack of high-quality evidence. Recent preclinical reports of adverse effects of general anesthetics on the developing brain have increased awareness of the potential benefit of neuraxial anesthesia/analgesia to avoid or reduce general anesthetic dose requirements. However, the developing spinal cord is also vulnerable to drug-related toxicity, and although there are well-established preclinical models and criteria for assessing spinal cord toxicity in adult animals, until recently there had been no systematic evaluation during early life. Therefore, in the second half of this review, we present preclinical data evaluating age-dependent changes in the pharmacodynamic response to different spinal analgesics, and recent studies evaluating spinal toxicity in specific developmental models. Finally, we advocate use of neuraxial drugs with the widest demonstrable safety margin and suggest minimum standards for preclinical evaluation before adoption of new analgesics or preparations into routine clinical practice.

Indexed as

Age FactorsAnalgesiaAnalgesicsAnimalsApneaHumansInfantInfant, NewbornInjections, SpinalPostoperative ComplicationsResearch DesignAnalgesics

Identifiers

PMID22798528
PMCPMC4451199
OpenAlexW2096421125

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

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.