Tachyphylaxis to local anaesthetics. What is the clinical evidence? A systematic review
Background Tachyphylaxis or acute tolerance to local anaesthetics has been reported, but the prevalence in clinical analgesia is obscure, and the mechanisms behind this phenomenon remain unclear. We sought to examine the clinical significance of tachyphylaxis from the available literature. Methods W...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica 2016-01, Vol.60 (1), p.6-14 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 14 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 6 |
| container_title | Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica |
| container_volume | 60 |
| creator | Kongsgaard, U. E. Werner, M. U. |
| description | Background
Tachyphylaxis or acute tolerance to local anaesthetics has been reported, but the prevalence in clinical analgesia is obscure, and the mechanisms behind this phenomenon remain unclear. We sought to examine the clinical significance of tachyphylaxis from the available literature.
Methods
We performed a systematic review of the literature utilising the databases PubMed and Embase employing the search terms [Tachyphylaxis AND Local Anaesthetics AND Human] AND [Tolerance AND Local Anaesthetics AND Human].
Results
A total of 66 records were identified. Thirty‐four articles were assessed in full text for eligibility. Twenty studies were considered relevant for qualitative analyses, but only six studies were randomised controlled trials. Because of the heterogeneity of the randomised controlled trials, it was not possible to conduct a meta‐analysis.
Conclusion
Studies documenting tachyphylaxis with clinical use of local anaesthetics are surprisingly scarce, and the mechanisms behind it remain unclear. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/aas.12631 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1760870810</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3922395221</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4891-652ba46279fb91bd5ffe4b90b69cfbab03a4d552e7c30e52db2f109b248ab1843</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kUFv0zAYhi3ExMrYgT-ALHEZh3T-7DiOT6iaYGOq4ECnHq3PjqN4pEmJU7b8e1y67YC0-WLZfr5Hr_wS8h7YHNI6R4xz4IWAV2QGQuuskKp4TWaMMcgkKH5M3sZ4m44i1_oNOU6sLEHpGVmv0DXTtplavA-Rjj1te4ctxQ59HBs_BhfndN3gSPfPjaeuDV3YI_5PqHzn_Ge6oHGKo99goumQ7v3dO3JUYxv96cN-Qm6-flldXGXLH5ffLhbLzOWlhhSUW8wLrnRtNdhK1rXPrWa20K62aJnAvJKSe-UE85JXltfAtOV5iRbKXJyQs4N3O_S_dymy2YTofNti5_tdNKAKVipWAkvox__Q2343dCmd4QCFUpKJ8iUKlNybQIpEfTpQbuhjHHxttkPY4DAZYGbfiUmdmH-dJPbDg3FnN756Ih9LSMD5AbgLrZ-eN5nF4uejMjtMhPTt908TOPwyhRJKmvX3S3O9vCpzplZmKf4Crvii_w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1757081153</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Tachyphylaxis to local anaesthetics. What is the clinical evidence? A systematic review</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Journals</source><creator>Kongsgaard, U. E. ; Werner, M. U.</creator><creatorcontrib>Kongsgaard, U. E. ; Werner, M. U.</creatorcontrib><description>Background
Tachyphylaxis or acute tolerance to local anaesthetics has been reported, but the prevalence in clinical analgesia is obscure, and the mechanisms behind this phenomenon remain unclear. We sought to examine the clinical significance of tachyphylaxis from the available literature.
Methods
We performed a systematic review of the literature utilising the databases PubMed and Embase employing the search terms [Tachyphylaxis AND Local Anaesthetics AND Human] AND [Tolerance AND Local Anaesthetics AND Human].
Results
A total of 66 records were identified. Thirty‐four articles were assessed in full text for eligibility. Twenty studies were considered relevant for qualitative analyses, but only six studies were randomised controlled trials. Because of the heterogeneity of the randomised controlled trials, it was not possible to conduct a meta‐analysis.
Conclusion
Studies documenting tachyphylaxis with clinical use of local anaesthetics are surprisingly scarce, and the mechanisms behind it remain unclear.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0001-5172</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1399-6576</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/aas.12631</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26358179</identifier><identifier>CODEN: AANEAB</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Analgesia ; Anesthetics ; Anesthetics, Local - adverse effects ; Clinical trials ; Heterogeneity ; Humans ; Literature reviews ; Pain perception ; Prevalence ; Qualitative analysis ; Randomization ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ; Systematic review ; Tachyphylaxis</subject><ispartof>Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, 2016-01, Vol.60 (1), p.6-14</ispartof><rights>2015 The Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd</rights><rights>2015 The Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2015 The Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4891-652ba46279fb91bd5ffe4b90b69cfbab03a4d552e7c30e52db2f109b248ab1843</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4891-652ba46279fb91bd5ffe4b90b69cfbab03a4d552e7c30e52db2f109b248ab1843</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Faas.12631$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Faas.12631$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27903,27904,45553,45554</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26358179$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kongsgaard, U. E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Werner, M. U.</creatorcontrib><title>Tachyphylaxis to local anaesthetics. What is the clinical evidence? A systematic review</title><title>Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica</title><addtitle>Acta Anaesthesiol. Scand</addtitle><description>Background
Tachyphylaxis or acute tolerance to local anaesthetics has been reported, but the prevalence in clinical analgesia is obscure, and the mechanisms behind this phenomenon remain unclear. We sought to examine the clinical significance of tachyphylaxis from the available literature.
Methods
We performed a systematic review of the literature utilising the databases PubMed and Embase employing the search terms [Tachyphylaxis AND Local Anaesthetics AND Human] AND [Tolerance AND Local Anaesthetics AND Human].
Results
A total of 66 records were identified. Thirty‐four articles were assessed in full text for eligibility. Twenty studies were considered relevant for qualitative analyses, but only six studies were randomised controlled trials. Because of the heterogeneity of the randomised controlled trials, it was not possible to conduct a meta‐analysis.
Conclusion
Studies documenting tachyphylaxis with clinical use of local anaesthetics are surprisingly scarce, and the mechanisms behind it remain unclear.</description><subject>Analgesia</subject><subject>Anesthetics</subject><subject>Anesthetics, Local - adverse effects</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Heterogeneity</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Literature reviews</subject><subject>Pain perception</subject><subject>Prevalence</subject><subject>Qualitative analysis</subject><subject>Randomization</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><subject>Tachyphylaxis</subject><issn>0001-5172</issn><issn>1399-6576</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kUFv0zAYhi3ExMrYgT-ALHEZh3T-7DiOT6iaYGOq4ECnHq3PjqN4pEmJU7b8e1y67YC0-WLZfr5Hr_wS8h7YHNI6R4xz4IWAV2QGQuuskKp4TWaMMcgkKH5M3sZ4m44i1_oNOU6sLEHpGVmv0DXTtplavA-Rjj1te4ctxQ59HBs_BhfndN3gSPfPjaeuDV3YI_5PqHzn_Ge6oHGKo99goumQ7v3dO3JUYxv96cN-Qm6-flldXGXLH5ffLhbLzOWlhhSUW8wLrnRtNdhK1rXPrWa20K62aJnAvJKSe-UE85JXltfAtOV5iRbKXJyQs4N3O_S_dymy2YTofNti5_tdNKAKVipWAkvox__Q2343dCmd4QCFUpKJ8iUKlNybQIpEfTpQbuhjHHxttkPY4DAZYGbfiUmdmH-dJPbDg3FnN756Ih9LSMD5AbgLrZ-eN5nF4uejMjtMhPTt908TOPwyhRJKmvX3S3O9vCpzplZmKf4Crvii_w</recordid><startdate>201601</startdate><enddate>201601</enddate><creator>Kongsgaard, U. E.</creator><creator>Werner, M. U.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201601</creationdate><title>Tachyphylaxis to local anaesthetics. What is the clinical evidence? A systematic review</title><author>Kongsgaard, U. E. ; Werner, M. U.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4891-652ba46279fb91bd5ffe4b90b69cfbab03a4d552e7c30e52db2f109b248ab1843</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Analgesia</topic><topic>Anesthetics</topic><topic>Anesthetics, Local - adverse effects</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Heterogeneity</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Literature reviews</topic><topic>Pain perception</topic><topic>Prevalence</topic><topic>Qualitative analysis</topic><topic>Randomization</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><topic>Tachyphylaxis</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kongsgaard, U. E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Werner, M. U.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kongsgaard, U. E.</au><au>Werner, M. U.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Tachyphylaxis to local anaesthetics. What is the clinical evidence? A systematic review</atitle><jtitle>Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica</jtitle><addtitle>Acta Anaesthesiol. Scand</addtitle><date>2016-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>60</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>6</spage><epage>14</epage><pages>6-14</pages><issn>0001-5172</issn><eissn>1399-6576</eissn><coden>AANEAB</coden><abstract>Background
Tachyphylaxis or acute tolerance to local anaesthetics has been reported, but the prevalence in clinical analgesia is obscure, and the mechanisms behind this phenomenon remain unclear. We sought to examine the clinical significance of tachyphylaxis from the available literature.
Methods
We performed a systematic review of the literature utilising the databases PubMed and Embase employing the search terms [Tachyphylaxis AND Local Anaesthetics AND Human] AND [Tolerance AND Local Anaesthetics AND Human].
Results
A total of 66 records were identified. Thirty‐four articles were assessed in full text for eligibility. Twenty studies were considered relevant for qualitative analyses, but only six studies were randomised controlled trials. Because of the heterogeneity of the randomised controlled trials, it was not possible to conduct a meta‐analysis.
Conclusion
Studies documenting tachyphylaxis with clinical use of local anaesthetics are surprisingly scarce, and the mechanisms behind it remain unclear.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>26358179</pmid><doi>10.1111/aas.12631</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0001-5172 |
| ispartof | Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, 2016-01, Vol.60 (1), p.6-14 |
| issn | 0001-5172 1399-6576 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1760870810 |
| source | MEDLINE; Wiley Journals |
| subjects | Analgesia Anesthetics Anesthetics, Local - adverse effects Clinical trials Heterogeneity Humans Literature reviews Pain perception Prevalence Qualitative analysis Randomization Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic Systematic review Tachyphylaxis |
| title | Tachyphylaxis to local anaesthetics. What is the clinical evidence? A systematic review |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-24T20%3A59%3A39IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Tachyphylaxis%20to%20local%20anaesthetics.%20What%20is%20the%20clinical%20evidence?%20A%20systematic%20review&rft.jtitle=Acta%20anaesthesiologica%20Scandinavica&rft.au=Kongsgaard,%20U.%20E.&rft.date=2016-01&rft.volume=60&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=6&rft.epage=14&rft.pages=6-14&rft.issn=0001-5172&rft.eissn=1399-6576&rft.coden=AANEAB&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/aas.12631&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3922395221%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1757081153&rft_id=info:pmid/26358179&rfr_iscdi=true |