MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2324884195 · doi:10.11154/pain.27.1

<b>Suppression of Central post-stroke pain with Sarpogrelate hydrochloride and Paroxetine </b>

2012· article· en· W2324884195 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Youichi Saitoh

Bibliographic record

VenuePAIN RESEARCH · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuropathic painMedicineAnesthesiaMcGill Pain QuestionnaireStroke (engine)Visual analogue scale

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Central post-stroke pain (CPSP) is the most difficult to treat among the neuropathic pains. The occurrence of CPSP was reported to be 1 - 8% after stroke. However, there has been no standard treatment for CPSP. It has been reported that anti-epileptogenic drug, anti-depressant and motor cortex electrical stimulation were effective for CPSP.Sarpogrelate hydrochloride (Sarpo), 5-HT2A antagonist, is effective on some peripheral neuropathic pain. Paroxetine (Parox), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) is also an inhibitor of P2X4 receptor on microglia. Inoue et al reported that inhibition of P2X4 receptor on microglia produced pain reduction in neuropathic pain originating from spinal cord of the animal model. Parox is reported to be some effective on central pain. In this time, Sarpo (300 mg/day) and Parox (20 mg/day) were administered to CPSP patients (13 patients with Sarpo and 14 with Parox) for 3 months. The pain was evaluated by visual analogue scale (VAS), Pain Questionaire (SF-MPQ), and modified MPQ. Sarpo was not significantly effective on CPSP. On the other hand, in Parox group, McGill three patients showed 30% score reduction by SF-MPQ and modified MPQ. Five patients felt better without score reduction and wish to be administered after 3 months. After three months, Parox was increased to 40 mg/day, and two patients showed pain reduction. The effectiveness of Sarpo on the peripheral neuropathic pain is mainly caused by improved peripheral circulation. Sarpo cannot penetrate through blood-brain-barrier. Parox may act on P2X4 receptor surround of old infarction and hematoma, but in chronic state of stroke, it is very doubtful that microglia survived and generated neuropathic pain for long time. Probably Parox acts on brain serotonergic system and reduced pain. Parox (40 mg/day) acts on both serotonergic and noradrenergic systems. Probably some patients respond to Parox (40 mg/day) and showed pain reduction by this mechanism. In next stage, we will evaluate Parox (40 mg/day) on CPSP, and compare with Duroxetine.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.285 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePAIN RESEARCHSame topicPain Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207