Priapism — A Rare Complication FollowingContinuous Epidural Morphine andBupivacaine Infusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Intraspinal drug delivery (IDD) therapy has been increasingly used in patients with intractable, nonmalignant pain who fail to respond to conventional treatment or can not tolerate systemic opioid therapy due to side effects. By infusing a small amount of analgesics directly into the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) in close proximity to the receptor sites in the spinal cord, one is able to achieve the spinally mediated analgesia, sparing side effects ffrom systemic opioids. Prior to permanent intraspinal pump implantation, an intraspinal opioid screening trial is required to document the efficacy of intraspinal opioid for analgesia. Although there are a few approaches in conducting such screening trials, a patient-controlled continuous epidural morphine infusion trial, performed in an outpatient setting, is widely accepted by many interventional pain specialists. The major advantage of conducting an outpatient functional opioid infusion trial versus an inpatient trial is that it more closely mimics what the patient does in his or her usual activities of daily living, therefore minimizing the false positive rate of the inpatient screening trial. Objective: To describe a rare complication, priapism, observed during an outpatient continuous epidural morphine and bupivacaine infusion trial. Case Report: A 49-year-old male with intractable, chronic low back pain due to diffuse lumbar degenerative disc disease, lumbar spondylosis referred to our clinic for consideration of IDD therapy, after failing to respond to multi-modality pain management including medications, physical therapy with modality, transcutaneous nerve stimulation (TENS), and various interventional procedures. Following a pre-implant psychological evaluation, he was scheduled for the outpatient epidural morphine and bupivacaine infusion trial. A tunneled lumbar epidural a catheter was placed at L3-L4 with the catheter tip advanced to L1 under fluoroscopic guidance. The proximal tip of the catheter was then tunneled, subcutaneously, and connected to a MicrojectTM PCEA pump (Codman, Raynham, MA, USA) and reservoir bag containing preservative-free morphine 0.4 mg/mL and bupivacaine 0.016%. The pump was programmed to deliver a basal rate of 0.5 mL/h. The bolus dose was 0.2 mL with a 60-minute lock out interval. The patient was instructed how to use the pump properly before discharging home. Two hours following the initiation of infusion trial, the patient started to experience penile erection. It was initially painless, but became progressively painful and intensified. The unremitting priapism lasted 8 hours, finally resolving 2 to 3 hours after discontinuing the infusion. The patient recovered fully without any sequelae. Conclusion: Priapism may occur as a rare complication following epidural morphine administration. This report represents the third case report thus far in the literature revealing priapism induced by epidural morphine administration, yet, it is the only report, to our knowledge, describing priapism occurring in a patient undergoing an outpatient epidural morphine and bupivacaine infusion trial. We believe that epidural morphine, rather than bupivacaine, is responsible for causing priapism in this patient, through a yet to be defined spinal mechanism. Key words: Epidural morphine and bupivacaine infusion trial, intraspinal drug delivery pump, priapism
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".