痉挛的传统药物治疗。第二部分:一般和区域处理。

Muscle & nerve. Supplement Pub Date : 1997-01-01
J M Gracies, P Nance, E Elovic, J McGuire, D M Simpson
{"title":"痉挛的传统药物治疗。第二部分:一般和区域处理。","authors":"J M Gracies,&nbsp;P Nance,&nbsp;E Elovic,&nbsp;J McGuire,&nbsp;D M Simpson","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Systemic pharmacologic treatments may be indicated in conditions in which the distribution of muscle overactivity is diffuse. Antispastic drugs act in the CNS either by suppression of excitation (glutamate) enhancement of inhibition (GABA, glycine), or a combination of the two. Only four drugs are currently approved by the US FDA as antispactic agents: baclofen, diazepam, dantrolene sodium, and tizanidine. However, there are a number of other drugs available with proven antispastic action. This chapter reviews the pharmacology, physiology of action, dosage, and results from controlled clinical trials on side effects, efficacy, and indications for 21 drugs in several categories. Categories reviewed include agents acting through the GABAergic system (baclofen, benzodiazepines, piracetam, progabide); drugs affecting ion flux (dantrolene sodium, lamotrigine, riluzole; drugs acting on monoamines (tizanidine, clonidine, thymoxamine, beta blockers, and cyproheptadine); drugs acting on excitatory amino acids (orphenadrine citrate); cannabinoids; inhibitory neuromediators; and other miscellaneous agents. The technique, advantages and limitations of intrathecal administration of baclofen, morphine, and midazolam are reviewed. Two consistent limitations appear throughout the controlled studies reviewed: the lack of quantitative and sensitive functional assessment and the lack of comparative trials between different agents. In the majority of trials in which meaningful functional assessment was included, the study drug failed to improve function, even though the antispastic action was significant. Placebo-controlled trials of virtually all major centrally acting antispastic agents have shown that sedation, reduction of global performance, and muscle weakness are frequent side effects. It appears preferable to use centrally acting drugs such as baclofen, tizanidine, and diazepam in spasticity of spinal origin (spinal cord injury and multiple sclerosis), whereas dantrolene sodium, due to its primarily peripheral mechanism of action, may be preferable in spasticity of cerebral origin (stroke and traumatic brain injury) where sensitivity to sedating effects is generally higher. Intrathecal administration of antispastic drugs has been used mainly in cases of muscle overactivity occurring primarily in the lower limbs in nonambulatory, severely disabled patients but new indications may emerge in spasticity of cerebral origin. Intrathecal therapy is an invasive procedure involving long-term implantation of a foreign device, and the potential disadvantages must be weighed against the level of disability in each patient and the resistance to other forms of antispastic therapy. In all forms of treatment of muscle overactivity, one must distinguish between two different goals of therapy: improvement of active function and improvement of hygiene and comfort. The risk of global performance reduction associated with general or regional administration of antispastic drugs may be more acceptable when the primary goal of therapy is hygiene and comfort than when active function is a priority.</p>","PeriodicalId":79355,"journal":{"name":"Muscle & nerve. Supplement","volume":"6 ","pages":"S92-120"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1997-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Traditional pharmacological treatments for spasticity. Part II: General and regional treatments.\",\"authors\":\"J M Gracies,&nbsp;P Nance,&nbsp;E Elovic,&nbsp;J McGuire,&nbsp;D M Simpson\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Systemic pharmacologic treatments may be indicated in conditions in which the distribution of muscle overactivity is diffuse. Antispastic drugs act in the CNS either by suppression of excitation (glutamate) enhancement of inhibition (GABA, glycine), or a combination of the two. Only four drugs are currently approved by the US FDA as antispactic agents: baclofen, diazepam, dantrolene sodium, and tizanidine. However, there are a number of other drugs available with proven antispastic action. This chapter reviews the pharmacology, physiology of action, dosage, and results from controlled clinical trials on side effects, efficacy, and indications for 21 drugs in several categories. Categories reviewed include agents acting through the GABAergic system (baclofen, benzodiazepines, piracetam, progabide); drugs affecting ion flux (dantrolene sodium, lamotrigine, riluzole; drugs acting on monoamines (tizanidine, clonidine, thymoxamine, beta blockers, and cyproheptadine); drugs acting on excitatory amino acids (orphenadrine citrate); cannabinoids; inhibitory neuromediators; and other miscellaneous agents. The technique, advantages and limitations of intrathecal administration of baclofen, morphine, and midazolam are reviewed. Two consistent limitations appear throughout the controlled studies reviewed: the lack of quantitative and sensitive functional assessment and the lack of comparative trials between different agents. In the majority of trials in which meaningful functional assessment was included, the study drug failed to improve function, even though the antispastic action was significant. Placebo-controlled trials of virtually all major centrally acting antispastic agents have shown that sedation, reduction of global performance, and muscle weakness are frequent side effects. It appears preferable to use centrally acting drugs such as baclofen, tizanidine, and diazepam in spasticity of spinal origin (spinal cord injury and multiple sclerosis), whereas dantrolene sodium, due to its primarily peripheral mechanism of action, may be preferable in spasticity of cerebral origin (stroke and traumatic brain injury) where sensitivity to sedating effects is generally higher. Intrathecal administration of antispastic drugs has been used mainly in cases of muscle overactivity occurring primarily in the lower limbs in nonambulatory, severely disabled patients but new indications may emerge in spasticity of cerebral origin. Intrathecal therapy is an invasive procedure involving long-term implantation of a foreign device, and the potential disadvantages must be weighed against the level of disability in each patient and the resistance to other forms of antispastic therapy. In all forms of treatment of muscle overactivity, one must distinguish between two different goals of therapy: improvement of active function and improvement of hygiene and comfort. The risk of global performance reduction associated with general or regional administration of antispastic drugs may be more acceptable when the primary goal of therapy is hygiene and comfort than when active function is a priority.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":79355,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Muscle & nerve. Supplement\",\"volume\":\"6 \",\"pages\":\"S92-120\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1997-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Muscle & nerve. Supplement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Muscle & nerve. Supplement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在肌肉过度活动呈弥漫性分布的情况下,可能需要进行全身药物治疗。抗痉挛药物通过抑制兴奋(谷氨酸)增强抑制(GABA,甘氨酸)或两者结合在中枢神经系统中起作用。目前只有四种药物被美国食品和药物管理局批准为止泻药:巴氯芬、地西泮、丹曲林钠和替扎尼定。然而,也有一些其他药物被证实具有抗痉挛作用。本章回顾了21种药物的药理学、作用生理学、剂量、副作用、疗效和适应症的对照临床试验结果。审查的类别包括通过gaba能系统起作用的药物(巴氯芬、苯二氮卓类药物、吡拉西坦、丙戊酸);影响离子通量的药物(丹曲林钠、拉莫三嗪、利鲁唑);单胺类药物(tizanidine, clonidine, thymoxamine, -受体阻滞剂和cyproheptadine);作用于兴奋性氨基酸的药物(柠檬酸奥非那定);大麻类;抑制neuromediators;以及其他杂项代理。本文综述了巴氯芬、吗啡和咪达唑仑鞘内给药的技术、优点和局限性。在对照研究中出现了两个一致的局限性:缺乏定量和敏感的功能评估,以及缺乏不同药物之间的比较试验。在包括有意义的功能评估的大多数试验中,研究药物未能改善功能,即使抗痉挛作用是显著的。几乎所有主要中枢作用抗痉挛药的安慰剂对照试验表明,镇静、整体表现下降和肌肉无力是常见的副作用。对于脊髓源性痉挛(脊髓损伤和多发性硬化症),首选中枢作用药物如巴氯芬、替扎尼定和地西泮,而对于脑源性痉挛(中风和创伤性脑损伤),由于其主要的外周作用机制,可能更适合使用丹曲林钠,因为这些药物对镇静作用的敏感性通常更高。鞘内给药抗痉挛药物主要用于肌肉过度活动的情况下,主要发生在下肢的非活动,严重残疾的患者,但新的适应症可能出现在脑源性痉挛。鞘内治疗是一种侵入性手术,涉及长期植入外来装置,潜在的缺点必须与每位患者的残疾程度和对其他形式的抗痉挛治疗的抵抗力进行权衡。在所有形式的肌肉过度活动的治疗中,必须区分两个不同的治疗目标:改善活动功能和改善卫生和舒适。当治疗的主要目标是卫生和舒适时,与优先考虑活动功能时相比,一般或局部使用抗痉挛药物相关的整体表现降低的风险可能更容易接受。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Traditional pharmacological treatments for spasticity. Part II: General and regional treatments.

Systemic pharmacologic treatments may be indicated in conditions in which the distribution of muscle overactivity is diffuse. Antispastic drugs act in the CNS either by suppression of excitation (glutamate) enhancement of inhibition (GABA, glycine), or a combination of the two. Only four drugs are currently approved by the US FDA as antispactic agents: baclofen, diazepam, dantrolene sodium, and tizanidine. However, there are a number of other drugs available with proven antispastic action. This chapter reviews the pharmacology, physiology of action, dosage, and results from controlled clinical trials on side effects, efficacy, and indications for 21 drugs in several categories. Categories reviewed include agents acting through the GABAergic system (baclofen, benzodiazepines, piracetam, progabide); drugs affecting ion flux (dantrolene sodium, lamotrigine, riluzole; drugs acting on monoamines (tizanidine, clonidine, thymoxamine, beta blockers, and cyproheptadine); drugs acting on excitatory amino acids (orphenadrine citrate); cannabinoids; inhibitory neuromediators; and other miscellaneous agents. The technique, advantages and limitations of intrathecal administration of baclofen, morphine, and midazolam are reviewed. Two consistent limitations appear throughout the controlled studies reviewed: the lack of quantitative and sensitive functional assessment and the lack of comparative trials between different agents. In the majority of trials in which meaningful functional assessment was included, the study drug failed to improve function, even though the antispastic action was significant. Placebo-controlled trials of virtually all major centrally acting antispastic agents have shown that sedation, reduction of global performance, and muscle weakness are frequent side effects. It appears preferable to use centrally acting drugs such as baclofen, tizanidine, and diazepam in spasticity of spinal origin (spinal cord injury and multiple sclerosis), whereas dantrolene sodium, due to its primarily peripheral mechanism of action, may be preferable in spasticity of cerebral origin (stroke and traumatic brain injury) where sensitivity to sedating effects is generally higher. Intrathecal administration of antispastic drugs has been used mainly in cases of muscle overactivity occurring primarily in the lower limbs in nonambulatory, severely disabled patients but new indications may emerge in spasticity of cerebral origin. Intrathecal therapy is an invasive procedure involving long-term implantation of a foreign device, and the potential disadvantages must be weighed against the level of disability in each patient and the resistance to other forms of antispastic therapy. In all forms of treatment of muscle overactivity, one must distinguish between two different goals of therapy: improvement of active function and improvement of hygiene and comfort. The risk of global performance reduction associated with general or regional administration of antispastic drugs may be more acceptable when the primary goal of therapy is hygiene and comfort than when active function is a priority.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信