1985
DOI: 10.1213/00000539-198511000-00009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Effect of Epidural Somatostatin on Postoperative Pain

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
21
1

Year Published

1990
1990
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 78 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
21
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Third, intrathecally applied SOM inhibits motor reflexes in response to noxious stimuli and reduces c-Fos expression and mechanical hyperalgesia in neuropathic pain model (Mollenholt et al, 1988;Tsai et al, 2002). Finally, SOM has been shown to be analgesic when given systemically to patients with cluster headache, or when given intrathecally to patients with cancer pain or postoperative pain (Sicuteri et al, 1984;Chrubasik et al, 1985;Meynadier et al, 1985;Penn et al, 1992;Paice et al, 1996). Collectively, these findings suggest that SOM plays a significant role in the transmission of nociceptive information.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…Third, intrathecally applied SOM inhibits motor reflexes in response to noxious stimuli and reduces c-Fos expression and mechanical hyperalgesia in neuropathic pain model (Mollenholt et al, 1988;Tsai et al, 2002). Finally, SOM has been shown to be analgesic when given systemically to patients with cluster headache, or when given intrathecally to patients with cancer pain or postoperative pain (Sicuteri et al, 1984;Chrubasik et al, 1985;Meynadier et al, 1985;Penn et al, 1992;Paice et al, 1996). Collectively, these findings suggest that SOM plays a significant role in the transmission of nociceptive information.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…Whether intrathecal administration of SST antagonist would have had an antinociceptive effect is an important question considering the fact that SST administration itself could prove neurotoxic (Gaumann and Yaksh, 1988;Mollenholt et al, 1994). Intriguingly, intrathecal administration of SST in humans (Chrubasik et al, 1985;Mollenholt et al, 1994) and in rats (Chapman and Dickenson, 1992) produced antinociception. While the exact reason for these findings needs to be studied, it may be hypothesized that this could have been due to diffusion rostrally to the brain as is often noted after intrathecal morphine treatment, sometimes with near-fatal or fatal consequences (Carvalho, 2008).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The use of SRIF as a spinal pain killer in clinical practice was first described by Chrubasik et al [70][71][72]. In the 15 years since this first indication, multiple studies have been carried out in various countries despite the fact that the clinical use of SRIF has often achieved non-univocal results [73,74], both in its use for patients with cancer in the terminal stage [75] and in postoperative pain [76].…”
Section: Analgesic Action Of Srif Via Spinal Administrationmentioning
confidence: 99%