Kissin Igor
The Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, 02115 USA.
Curr Rev Clin Exp Pharmacol. 2023;19(1):61-67. doi: 10.2174/2772432817666220609093243.
Opioids administered into the spinal space by intrathecal or epidural routes can provide potent and prolonged selective analgesia. Compared to the systemic administration of opioids, spinal administration can bring about analgesia with fewer central and systemic adverse effects. For the past 40 years, spinal opioid analgesia has achieved great popularity in various fields of pain treatment. The aim of this work is to identify clinical studies that initiated the use of spinal opioids for the treatment of pain. To determine the historical role of each of the review's studies, we used the combination of two factors: the study priority in terms of the time of its publication and the degree of its acknowledgement in the form of citation impact. The date of publication was regarded as the primary factor, but only if the count of citations indicated a sufficient acknowledgement by the other authors. The citation impact was assessed as the initial citation count - for a period of five years after the year of article publication - and the total count. Analysis of the related data shows that the clinical studies initiating the use of spinal opioids for the treatment of pain belong to two groups of authors - Wang et and Behar et Both studies were published in 1979 and described delivery of morphine into the spinal space, although the techniques of administration were different: Wang et injected morphine intrathecally, Behar et administered morphine epidurally. The response to these studies was overwhelming - close to a dozen reports on this topic were published in 1979 and more than a hundred - in 1980-1981. The total citation response to the Wang et article reached 699, and that to Behar et - 518. Two earlier records (1900-1901) of the use of intrathecal morphine, by Nicolae Racoviceanu-Pitesti and Otojiro Kitagawa, found no following in medical literature for more than three quarters of a century.
通过鞘内或硬膜外途径将阿片类药物注入脊髓腔可提供强效且持久的选择性镇痛作用。与全身性给予阿片类药物相比,脊髓给药能以较少的中枢和全身不良反应实现镇痛效果。在过去40年里,脊髓阿片类镇痛在疼痛治疗的各个领域都非常受欢迎。这项工作的目的是确定启动脊髓阿片类药物用于疼痛治疗的临床研究。为了确定该综述中每项研究的历史作用,我们使用了两个因素的组合:根据其发表时间确定的研究优先级以及以引用影响力形式体现的认可程度。发表日期被视为主要因素,但前提是引用次数表明得到了其他作者的充分认可。引用影响力通过初始引用次数(文章发表年份后的五年期间)和总引用次数来评估。对相关数据的分析表明,启动脊髓阿片类药物用于疼痛治疗的临床研究属于两组作者——王等人和贝哈尔等人。两项研究均发表于1979年,描述了将吗啡注入脊髓腔的情况,尽管给药技术不同:王等人进行鞘内注射吗啡,贝哈尔等人进行硬膜外注射吗啡。对这些研究的反应非常热烈——1979年发表了近十几篇关于该主题的报告,1980 - 1981年则超过了一百篇。王等人文章的总引用反应达到699次,贝哈尔等人的——518次。尼古拉·拉科维恰努 - 皮泰斯蒂和北川乙次郎在1900 - 1901年使用鞘内吗啡的两项早期记录,在超过四分之三个世纪的医学文献中都没有后续跟进。