Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-thh2z Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-15T20:10:28.248Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effects of morphine, diacetylmorphine and some related alkaloids upon the alimentary tract: Part V. A discussion on the probable mechanism of the constipating action of morphine

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

G. Norman Myers
G. Norman Myers
Affiliation:
From the Pharmacological Laboratory, Cambridge
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. The mechanical effects of morphine, heroin, codeine, dilaudid, dicodid, and eukodol upon the alimentary tract are discussed and contrasted.

2. The results of these mechanical effects upon the passage of food along the alimentary canal are discussed.

3. The constipating action of morphine is explained upon an almost purely mechanical basis.

4. From experimental evidence it is concluded that dilaudid is probably a constipating drug although this effect may not be so marked as that produced by morphine.

5. There is no experimental evidence to suggest that the administration of dicodid would ever produce constipation.

6. It is suggested that small doses of eukodol are not constipating, whereas large doses, in certain circumstances which are discussed, may produce a mild degree of constipation.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 40 , Issue 5 , September 1940 , pp. 583 - 604
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1940

References

REFERENCES

Barclay, A. E. (1933). The Digestive Tract, p. 159. Camb. Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Best, C. H. & Taylor, N. B. (1939). The Physiological Basis of Medical Practice, 2nd ed. London: Bailliére, Tindall and Cox.Google Scholar
Gordonoff, T., Kato, T., Kohan, S. & Mayeda, S. (1925). Arch. Exp. Path. Pharmak. 106, 287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurst, A. F. (1909). Constipation and Allied Intestinal Disorders. London: Oxford Med. Pub.Google Scholar
Katsch, (1913). Zbl. Biochem. Biophys. 16, 181.Google Scholar
Magnus, R. (1906). Pflüg. Arch. ges. Physiol. 115, 316.Google Scholar
Magnus, R.(1908). Pflüg. Arch. ges. Physiol. 122, 210.Google Scholar
Mahlo, (1913). Dtsch. Arch. klin. Med. 110, 562.Google Scholar
Myers, G. N. (1933). Brit. Med. J. 2, 372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myers, G. N. (1939a). J. Hyg., Camb., 39, 375.Google Scholar
Myers, G. N. (1939b). J. Hyg., Camb., 39, 391.Google Scholar
Myers, G. N. (1939 c). J. Hyg., Camb., 39, 512.Google Scholar
Myers, G. N.(1940). J. Hyg., Camb., 40, 228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myers, G. N. & Davidson, S. W. (1938). J. Hyg., Camb., 38, 432.Google Scholar
Nothnagel, (1882). Virchows Arch. 79, 1.Google Scholar
Padtberg, J. H. (1911). Pflüg. Arch. ges. Physiol. 139, 318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pancoast, H. K. & Hopkins, A. H. (1915). J. Amer. med. Ass. 65, 2220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plant, O. H. & Miller, G. H. (1928). J. Pharmacol. 32, 437.Google Scholar
Schapiro, N. (1913). Pflüg. Arch. ges. Physiol. 151, 65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Takahashi, M. (1914). Pflüg. Arch. ges. Physiol. 159, 327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zehbe, M. (1913). Ther. Mh. (Halbmh.), 27, 406.Google Scholar
Zunz, E. (1921). Trav. Inst. Ther. Univ. Brux. 15.Google Scholar