Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27783629›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Efficacy of Intrathecal Morphine in a Model of Surgical Pain in Rats.

Aurelie Thomas, Amy Miller, Johnny Roughan, Aneesa Malik, Katherine Haylor, Charlotte Sandersen, Paul Flecknell, Matthew Leach

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Neuronal and glial factors contributing to sex differences in opioid modulation of pain.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2019
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Aurelie ThomasComparative Biology Centre, Institute of Neuroscience, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1655-3278
Amy MillerSchool of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
Johnny RoughanComparative Biology Centre, Institute of Neuroscience, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
Aneesa MalikRoyal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Katherine HaylorSchool of Biomedical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
Charlotte SandersenClinique Vétérinaire Universitaire, Faculté de Médecine Vétérinaire, Université de Liège, Liège, Belgium.
Paul FlecknellComparative Biology Centre, Institute of Neuroscience, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
Matthew LeachSchool of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
Newcastle University · GBUniversity of Liège · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Concerns over interactions between analgesics and experimental outcomes are a major reason for withholding opioids from rats undergoing surgical procedures. Only a fraction of morphine injected intravenously reaches receptors responsible for analgesia in the central nervous system. Intrathecal administration of morphine may represent a way to provide rats with analgesia while minimizing the amount of morphine injected. This study aimed to assess whether morphine injected intrathecally via direct lumbar puncture provides sufficient analgesia to rats exposed to acute surgical pain (caudal laparotomy).In an initial blinded, randomised study, pain-free rats received morphine subcutaneously (MSC, 3mg.kg-1, N = 6), intrathecally (MIT, 0.2mg.kg-1, N = 6); NaCl subcutaneously (NSC, N = 6) or intrathecally (NIT, N = 6). Previously validated pain behaviours, activity and Rat Grimace Scale (RGS) scores were recorded at baseline, 1, 2, 4 and 8h post-injection. Morphine-treated rats had similar behaviours to NaCl rats, but their RGS scores were significantly different over time and between treatments. In a second blinded study, rats (N = 28) were randomly allocated to one of the following four treatments (N = 7): MSC, 3mg.kg-1, surgery; MIT, 0.2mg.kg-1, surgery; NIT, surgery; NSC, sham surgery. Composite Pain Behaviours (CPB) and RGS were recorded as previously. CPB in MIT and MSC groups were not significantly different to NSC group. MSC and MIT rats displayed significantly lower RGS scores than NIT rats at 1 and 8h postoperatively. RGS scores for MIT and MSC rats were not significantly different at 1, 2, and 8h postoperatively. Intraclass correlation value amongst operators involved in RGS scoring (N = 9) was 0.913 for total RGS score. Intrathecal morphine was mostly indistinguishable from its subcutaneous counterpart, providing pain relief lasting up to 8 hours in a rat model of surgical pain. Further studies are warranted to clarify the relevance of the rat grimace scale for assessing pain in rats that have received opioid analgesics.

Indexed as

Analgesics, OpioidAnimalsBehavior, AnimalDisease Models, AnimalFemaleInjections, SpinalMorphinePain MeasurementPostoperative PainRatsRats, WistarVideo RecordingAnalgesics, OpioidMorphine

Identifiers

PMID27783629
PMCPMC5082666
OpenAlexW2542161117

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.