Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23754483›Full record

ReviewDer Anaesthesist2013

[Breakthrough pain and short-acting opioids].

T Beutlhauser, J Oeltjenbruns, M Schäfer

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Anaesthesist, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

T BeutlhauserKlinik für Anästhesiologie mit Schwerpunkt Intensivmedizin, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Virchow Klinikum, Augustenburgerplatz 1, 13353 Berlin, Deutschland.
J Oeltjenbruns
M Schäfer

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Conventional opioid therapy consists of the regular administration of extended-release opioids following fixed time intervals and, as needed, the supplemental use of an immediate-release formulation. For the patient needs of such rescue medication, recent studies distinguished different scenarios, such as an inadequate daily opioid dose or time interval (end-of-dose failure) from so-called breakthrough pain where the attacks can suddenly occur either spontaneously (idiopathic pain) or due to certain provocations (incident pain) despite optimal dose adjustment. In line with this time course, a fast and short-lasting elevation of the opioid plasma concentration seems to be reasonable. Although in a recent European survey breakthrough pain attacks in the majority of cancer pain patients were sufficiently treated with immediate-release opioids, currently running clinical trials examine whether the application of transmucosal or intranasal fentanyl with their known reduced time to maximum plasma concentrations show a possible advantage in comparison to immediate-release opioids. In these clinical trials the pain intensity and number of pain episodes were significantly reduced following transmucosal or intranasal fentanyl; however, the magnitude of these effects does not convincingly appear to be clinically relevant. Among other reasons this may be related to the fact that those patients who would perhaps benefit from such treatment have not yet been identified.

Indexed as

Administration, IntranasalAdministration, MucosalAnalgesics, OpioidBreakthrough PainDelayed-Action PreparationsFentanylHumansIntractable PainNeoplasmsTreatment OutcomeAnalgesics, OpioidDelayed-Action PreparationsFentanyl

Identifiers

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.