title: Comparison of subjective and objective analgesic effects of intravenous and intrathecal morphine in chronic pain patients by heat beam dolorimetry.
abstract: The pain tolerance latencies of 10 chronic pain patients were evaluated by heat beam dolorimetry (stimulus intensity 15.33 mW.cm-2.sec-1) prior to and following administration of morphine by intrathecal (n = 5) or intravenous (n = 5) routes. Patients not undergoing opiate withdrawal evinced increased baseline pain tolerance latencies prior to drug administration compared with normal volunteers. Two patients undergoing the opiate withdrawal syndrome at the time of test experienced reduced pain tolerance latencies compared with normal volunteers, most probably corresponding to the hyperesthesia symptom of the syndrome. Intravenous morphine infusion (30 mg) induced a time-dependent increase in cutaneous pain tolerance with peak effect occurring 1-2 h after administration. This persisted for up to 4 h and thereafter declined. The time course of subjective pain self-report by visual pain analog scale (VPAS) measurements corresponded to the time course of increasing cutaneous pain tolerance latency assessed by dolorimetry. Pain self-reports following intrathecal morphine infusion (2.25 or 1 mg) followed a similar though slower onset to that reported by patients receiving intravenous morphine and was of lesser degree. In contrast, heat beam dolorimetric evidence of increased cutaneous pain tolerance (which was of lesser degree than following i.v. morphine) did not reach its maximum during the 4 h measuring period. A dissociation was noted therefore between the self-reported relief of endogenous pain and dolorimetrically measured cutaneous analgesia following intrathecal morphine administration. Linear regression correlation analysis characterized this phenomenon as a positive correlation between cutaneous pain tolerance and pain relief self-report following intravenous morphine infusion and a negative correlation following intrathecal administration. We propose that the phenomenon may be due to intrathecal morphine acting via two separate compartments: one spinal and one supraspinal.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
authors.affiliation: Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN 37232 U.S.A. Department of Surgery, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN 37232 U.S.A. Department of Neurosurgery, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN 37232 U.S.A.
authors.forename: Jonathan J
authors.initials: JJ
authors.lastname: Lipman
authors.forename: Bennett
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Blumenkopf
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D001100:Arachnoiditis / Q000150:complications; D002908:Chronic Disease; D005260:Female; D006358:Hot Temperature; D006801:Humans; D007275:Injections, Intravenous; D007278:Injections, Spinal; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009020:Morphine / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D009369:Neoplasms / Q000150:complications; D010146:Pain / Q000188:drug therapy* / Q000209:etiology; D010147:Pain Measurement
chemical_list: D009020:Morphine