ArticlePain and therapy2016
Prolonged Analgesic Effect of PRF-108 and PRF-110 on Post-operative Pain in Pigs.
Article in Pain and therapy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of pulsed radiofrequency modulation of thoracic dorsal root ganglion or intercostal nerve on postherpetic neuralgia in aged patients: a retrospective study.BMC neurology · 2021Article
- A novel excisional wound pain model for evaluation of analgesics in rats.The Korean journal of pain · 2021Article
- Article
- The effect of local/topical analgesics on incisional pain in a pig model.Journal of pain research · 2017Article
- Preclinical Pain Research: Can We Do Better?Anesthesiology · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLocal anesthetic infusion techniques have been reported to reduce opiate requirements and pain scores following different kinds of surgery, including orthopedic surgery, inguinal hernia, and Cesarean surgery in women.
methodsPRF-108 and PRF-110 formulations were applied to the wound space in an incisional model in pigs to test the hypothesis that these formulations have better and longer analgesic effects than the commercially available ropivacaine solution (Naropin(®), AstraZeneca).
resultsThe data show significantly better analgesic activity with PRF-108 and PRF-110 compared to ropivacaine. The duration of the analgesic efficacy of PRF-108 and PRF-110 was at least five times longer than that was measured following treatment with ropivacaine. The data further suggest that active clearance from the injection site (the wound) is much slower for PRF-108 and PRF-110 than for the commercial ropivacaine solution.
conclusionAssessing the local concentration of PRF compounds and commercially available ropivacaine solution suggests that active clearance from the injection site (the wound) is much slower for PRF-108 and PRF-110 than for ropivacaine.
fundingPainReform.
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.