Bladder-related pain is one of the most common forms of visceral pain, and visceral pain is among the most common complaints for which patients seek physician consultation. Despite extensive studies of visceral innervation and treatment of visceral pain, opioids remain a mainstay for management of bladder pain. Side effects associated with opioid therapy can profoundly diminish quality of life, and improved options for treatment of bladder pain remain a high priority. Endocannabinoids, primarily anandamide (AEA) and 2-arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG), are endogenously-produced fatty acid ethanolamides with that induce analgesia. Animal experiments have demonstrated that inhibition of enzymes that degrade AEA or 2-AG have the potential to prevent development of visceral and somatic pain. Although experimental results in animal models have been promising, clinical application of this approach has proven difficult. In addition to fatty acid amide hydrolase (FAAH; degrades AEA) and monacylglycerol lipase (MAGL; degrades 2-AG), cyclooxygenase (COX) acts to metabolize endocannabinoids. Another potential limitation of this strategy is that AEA activates pro-nociceptive transient receptor potential vanilloid 1 (TRPV1) channels. Dual inhibitors of FAAH and TRPV1 or FAAH and COX have been synthesized and are currently undergoing preclinical testing for efficacy in providing analgesia. Local inhibition of FAAH or MAGL within the bladder may be viable options to reduce pain associated with cystitis with fewer systemic side effects, but this has not been explored. Further investigation is required before manipulation of the endocannabinoid system can be proven as an efficacious alternative for management of bladder pain.
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science
3
9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences
2
6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
2
6%
Social Sciences
2
6%
Other
1
3%
Unknown
14
42%
Attention Score in Context
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 June 2018.
All research outputs
#14,397,110
of 23,505,010 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
#802
of 1,360 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,276
of 328,072 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
#13
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,505,010 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,360 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,072 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
