AN Evaluation OF DIHYDROMORPHINONE* IN TREATING POSTOPERATIVE PAIN

Hanna, Calvin; Mazuzan, John E.; Abajian, John

doi:10.1213/00000539-196211000-00017

Cited by 17 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One study, which compared intramuscular hydromorphone and morphine at different doses, concluded that hydromorphone is 7-10 times more potent than morphine. 24 Although heterogeneous in design, for most studies both opioids achieved adequate analgesia, with no reported significant differences in analgesic efficacy. In terms of adverse effects, nausea, sleepiness and pruritus (epidural administration) were the most frequent problems.…”

Section: Acute Painmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Review of Hydromorphone in Acute and Chronic Pain

Quigley

2003

Journal of Pain and Symptom Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While morphine is historically the gold standard for the management of severe cancer pain, some patients either do not achieve adequate analgesia, or suffer intolerable side effects from this drug. For these patients, alternatives such as hydromorphone are recommended. This review explores the evidence for the efficacy of hydromorphone in the management of pain. A systematic search, from 1966 to 2000, of published and unpublished randomized trials that involved the administration of hydromorphone for both acute and chronic pain conditions in adults and children, was conducted. Forty-three studies were included in the review; 11 involved chronic cancer pain and 32 acute pain. Approximately half the studies received a low quality score. In addition, the heterogeneity of the studies precluded combination of data and results. Overall, hydromorphone appears to be a potent analgesic. The limited number of studies available suggests that there is little difference between hydromorphone and other opioids in terms of analgesic efficacy, adverse effect profile and patient preference. However, most studies involved small numbers of patients and wide ranges in equianalgesic dose ratios, making it difficult to determine real differences between interventions.

show abstract

Section: Acute Painmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Review of Hydromorphone in Acute and Chronic Pain

Quigley

2003

Journal of Pain and Symptom Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A secondary purpose of this study was to determine the relative potency of hydromorphone to that of the benchmark full mu opioid agonist, morphine: two doses of morphine were compared to two putatively equianalgesic doses of hydromorphone. Clinical studies have established that hydromorphone is about 7-8 times as potent as morphine in producing analgesia (Hanna et al 1962;Mahler and Forrest 1975;Keeri-Szanto 1976;Houde 1986). In the only known potency study which examined non-analgesic endpoints such as subjective effects (Jasinski et al 1977), the potency ratio was slightly higher, i.e., 10:1.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing the subjective, psychomotor, and physiological effects of intravenous hydromorphone and morphine in healthy volunteers

2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Emetic effects were the main disadvantages found to follow dihydromorphinone. In volunteers, Seevers and Pfeiffer (1936) noted that nausea and vomiting after dihydromorphine 1 mg was less than that following morphine 10 mg. Hanna, Mazuzan and Abajian (1962) suggest that it has 7-10 times the milligram potency of morphine, which would imply that the 2-mg dose employed in the present study should have been compared with morphine 15 mg. Using an identical method of studying drugs, Dundee, Loan and Clarke (1966) found a 65 per cent incidence of vomiting and a 14 per cent incidence of nausea during the first 6 postoperative hours in patients premedicated with morphine 15 mg; these incidences are higher than those recorded in table IV for dihydromorphinone 2 mg. On the other hand, Eddy, Halbach and Braenden (1957) surveyed the findings of twenty-two workers who had compared the analgesic effectiveness of dihydromorphinone with that of morphine 10 mg.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%