Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33569488›Full record

ReviewAnnals of translational medicine2021

Narrative review of intrathecal drug delivery (IDD): indications, devices and potential complications.

Michele Antonio Capozza, Silvia Triarico, Stefano Mastrangelo, Giorgio Attinà, Palma Maurizi, Antonio Ruggiero

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of translational medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Gabapentin enhances the antinociceptive effect of intrathecal morphine in refractory cancer pain patients.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021
    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

6 authors.

Michele Antonio CapozzaUnità di Oncologia Pediatrica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Silvia TriaricoUnità di Oncologia Pediatrica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Stefano MastrangeloUnità di Oncologia Pediatrica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Giorgio AttinàUnità di Oncologia Pediatrica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Palma MauriziUnità di Oncologia Pediatrica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Antonio RuggieroUnità di Oncologia Pediatrica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The management of chronic refractory pain (non-neoplastic and cancer-related pain) remains a therapeutic challenge. The continuous intrathecal (IT) administration of drugs may play an important role in the possible management options. Intrathecal drug delivery devices (IDDDs) may be effective for patients with refractory chronic pain. Therefore, they may be adopted for non-oncologic pain in patients with compression fractures, spondylolisthesis, spondylosis, back surgery failure syndrome and spinal stenosis. Oncologic patients can benefit from these treatments in a variable way according to tumor characteristics, prognosis, periprocedural imaging and risk of disease progression. In this review, we describe the most commonly used drugs (opioids and non-opioids), their pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic features and indications of use. The most used drugs are morphine, hydromorphone, fentanyl, methadone, bupivacaine, clonidine, and ketamine. Patient evaluation before the device implantation should be based on clinical examination, medical records assessment and psychometric evaluation. The infusion pumps available on the market are both non-programmable (with continuous IT deliver of drugs) and programmable (with variable deliver of drugs according to their flow rate). Moreover, we describe the procedure of implantation and the potential complications of IT drug delivery (such as bleeding, infection, loss of cerebrospinal fluid, wound seroma, loss of catheter pump propellant).

Indexed as

chronic paincomplications, surgical implantIntrathecal drug delivery devices (IDDDs)opioids

Identifiers

PMID33569488
PMCPMC7867880

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.