PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

R Wörz

Publications and source records attributed to R Wörz.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1995

[Long-term treatment of chronic pain with tilidine-naloxone. An analysis of 50 patients with chronic pain conditions of non-malignant origin].

METHOD: 50 patients with incurable chronic pain states were treated for a period of between six months and 14 years (median: 31 months) with tilidine-naloxone, and the results of tumor recorded. Amelioration of pain was achieved in an average of 60.7% of the cases. The 16 patients of this series suffering from neuropathic pain who received a somewhat lower dose responded equally as well (60.3% amelioration) as the overall group. In 24 patients suffering from pain, the daily dose remained unchanged throughout the course of treatment, had to be increased in 19, and was reduced in seven patients. In two patients, acceptable side-effects were indicated; in no case were there any signs of drug-induced organic damage. CONCLUSIONS: The results show that tilidine-naloxone is a highly effective opioid analgesic with a remarkably favorable benefit-risk ratio for use in long-term treatment.

Adult↗
PubMed1994

[Treatment of tumor pain with flupirtine. Results of a double-blind study versus tramadol].

STUDY DESIGN: In a multicentric double-blind trial, flupirtine was compared with tramadol in the treatment of cancer pain. METHODS: Over a period of four weeks, 4 (-6) capsules containing either 100 mg flupirtine (n = 35) or 50 mg tramadol (n = 36) were taken daily in accordance with a fixed time schedule. Severity of pain was scored on a weekly basis using a five-stage verbal scale. RESULTS: Initially comparable in the two groups, pain was more markedly reduced after four weeks of treatment with flupirtine than after tramadol, the need for additional analgesic drugs also being less in the flupirtine group. The final general assessment by the attending doctors of the results achieved was "good" to "very good" in 63% of the patients on flupirtine, and in 46% of those on tramadol. Undesired effects were observed in 6% of the flupirtine patients and in 19% of those taking tramadol.

Adult↗
PubMed1992

[Prevention of migraine using bisoprolol. Results of a double-blind study versus metoprolol].

AIMS: Comparison of bisoprolol, a beta-1 selective beta blocker with no intrinsic sympathomimetic activity (ISA) and metoprolol, which numerous studies have shown to be an effective migraine prophylactic. STUDY DESIGN: Multicentric, cross-over study. PATIENTS: 125 patients suffering at least from 3 attacks of classic or common migraine a month for at least two years. TREATMENT: Bisoprolol 5 mg given once a day, or metoprolol 50 mg given twice a day, for two periods of 12 weeks. RESULTS: 125 patients were admitted to the 4-week run-in phase. A comparison of the main target: frequency of migraine attacks was thus carried out in 78 patients (f. = 63, m. = 15). Both substances reduced the average frequency of migraine per 28-day period by about 50%. There was no statistically significant difference between the two beta-blockers (p greater than 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The results of the study show that 5 mg of bisoprolol and 100 mg of metoprolol a day have comparable efficacy for migraine prophylaxis, and show comparable tolerability.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗
PubMed1991

[Flupirtine in chronic myofacial pain conditions].

With respect to its molecular structure, mechanisms of action and the profile of action and side effects, Flupirtine is an innovative drug. It can be clearly distinguished from acetylsalicylic acid or NSAIDs on the one hand, and opioids on the other. Clinical observations and animal experiments have provided evidence for a muscle-relaxing effect. On the basis of this knowledge, an open prospective trial was conducted in 50 patients suffering from chronic myofascial pain. In 35 of these patients (70%), daily doses within the range 300-400 mg, individually 600 mg, resulted in definitive amelioration of pain. 17 patients developed side effects, namely somnolence, dizziness and rarely vomiting. In 3 patients, the side effects disappeared when the dose was reduced, the analgesic effect being preserved. On the basis of the data obtained to date, Flupirtine would appear to represent a new possibility for treating pain.

Adult↗
PubMed1990

[Pain syndromes following amputation. Analysis of 100 affected patients with chronic stump and phantom pain].

One hundred amputees (m = 95, f = 5) with a pain syndrome were analysed. In 80 patients post-amputation pain of the lower, in 20 of the upper, extremities presented. Thirty-two patients suffered bouts of pain, 68 constant pain of various types. The most commonly cited type of pain in the patients with intermittent pain was lancinating, in the case of constant pain a burning sensation. In some patients pain occurred immediately after the loss of the limb, in others not until several years, or even decades, later. Forty per cent of our patients indicated that the incidence and intensity of the pain increased with time. Neurological, orthopedic and internistic causes of stump or phantom pain have been described. In 72% of the patients with constant pain and in 34% of those suffering from bouts of pain, an algogenic psychosyndrome had developed. Complications and late sequelae of amputations are of considerable significance for the development and intensity of stump and phantom pain.

Adult↗
PubMed1984

Control of cancer pain with analgesics acting in the central nervous system.

Systemic administration of opioids is one of the traditional, but by no means optimized therapeutic procedures in cancer pain. Besides the underlying pathophysiology, appropriate treatment has to take into account the psychodynamics and behavior of the patient as well as his life expectancy. In view of this, therapy with centrally acting analgesics can be considered after administration of analgesics with peripheral action first and then of psychoactive agents. Nefopam is a centrally (but not spinally) acting analgesic with a novel activity profile. Its advantages and disadvantages in the treatment of carcinoma pain are outlined. The opiate agonist-antagonist principle has the advantage of a lower dependence and tolerance potential. In addition, the preparations pentazocine, tilidine plus naloxone, and buprenorphine deviate from the morphine derivatives in various constituent effects. Their actions and side effects are outlined. The optimization of control of cancer pain is not possible without taking into account the time dimension. In 50 pain patients with advanced cancer, the following main errors were observed in previous treatment of pain syndromes: (1) too early parenteral administration in the course of the disease; (2) underdosage; (3) application intervals that were too long; and (4) use of analgesics as needed by the patient or on request and not according to a time schedule.

Adult↗
PubMed1983

Effects and risks of psychotropic and analgesic combinations.

Psychotropic substances combined with simple analgesics are a common pharmacologic denominator in the dependency complex. More than 95 percent of patients studied took preparations containing barbiturates; the remaining few subjects used analgesics combined with caffeine. Dependence on compound analgesic preparations usually develops in patients with headaches--migraine, tension headaches, and other complex forms--since ergotamine-containing preparations are generally effective only at the onset of an attack, and prophylactic administration is, therefore, common. Once dependence has developed, reduction or discontinuation of the medication is typically followed after one or two days by an increase in the intensity of the pain. This may cause the patient to revert to these preparations in an attempt to reduce pain and may lead to an unfortunate vicious cycle. Therefore, cessation of psychotropic analgesic combinations is essential in the treatment of chronic pain.

Adult↗