You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 250 No. 17, November 4, 1983 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  ARTICLE
 This Article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in JAMA

Relief of continuous chronic pain by intraspinal narcotics infusion via an implanted reservoir

D. W. Coombs, R. L. Saunders, M. S. Gaylor, A. R. Block, T. Colton, R. Harbaugh, M. G. Pageau and W. Mroz

Ten patients with intractable pain (five cancer and five nonmalignant) were treated with continuous intraspinal morphine delivered by an implanted continuous infusion system. Both patient groups were evaluated and compared using an identical battery of psychometric examinations administered before and 12 weeks after therapy. The cancer-pain group reported significant reduction in pain on serial visual pain analogue scales at 12 weeks compared with no change in the nonmalignant-pain group reports despite a much lower baseline report in the cancer group. Both groups of patients reduced their oral narcotic requirement significantly during continuous intraspinal morphine infusion. While the cancer patients took more oral narcotic at baseline, at 12 weeks no difference existed in oral intake between the two groups. Both groups required significant serial increases in infused morphine, indicating that spinal opiate receptor tolerance occurs. The results of this study confirm the sustained analgesic efficacy reported earlier in cancer-related pain syndromes, thus supporting further cautious expansion of this therapy within the cancer-related pain population. In contrast, a poor response was seen in the nonmalignant-pain group, consistent with the unsatisfactory responses to many potentially analgetic approaches to chronic nonmalignant pain. We are thus discouraged from further use of this therapy in the patient with chronic nonmalignant pain.

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Catheter-Associated Masses in Patients Receiving Intrathecal Analgesic Therapy
McMillan et al.
Anesth. Analg. 2003;96:186-190.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Treatment options for refractory pain: The role of intrathecal therapy
Wallace
Neurology 2002;59:S18-24.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Interventional analgesia: Epidural and subarachnoid therapy
Patt
AM J HOSP PALLIAT CARE 1989;6:11-14.
 

Opioid analgesics in the management of cancer pain
Lipman
AM J HOSP PALLIAT CARE 1989;6:13-23.
 

Continuous drug delivery by an implantable pump: A system eminently compatible with the philosophy of hospice care
Harbaugh and Reeder
AM J HOSP PALLIAT CARE 1984;1:17-20.
 





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1983 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.