↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Liposomal bupivacaine: a review of a new bupivacaine formulation

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain Research, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
1 patent
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
200 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
151 Mendeley
Title
Liposomal bupivacaine: a review of a new bupivacaine formulation
Published in
Journal of Pain Research, August 2012
DOI 10.2147/jpr.s27894
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kenneth Cummings, III, Chahar

Abstract

Many attempts have been made to increase the duration of local anesthetic action. One avenue of investigation has focused on encapsulating local anesthetics within carrier molecules to increase their residence time at the site of action. This article aims to review the literature surrounding the recently approved formulation of bupivacaine, which consists of bupivacaine loaded in multivesicular liposomes. This preparation increases the duration of local anesthetic action by slow release from the liposome and delays the peak plasma concentration when compared to plain bupivacaine administration. Liposomal bupivacaine has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for local infiltration for pain relief after bunionectomy and hemorrhoidectomy. Studies have shown it to be an effective tool for postoperative pain relief with opioid sparing effects and it has also been found to have an acceptable adverse effect profile. Its kinetics are favorable even in patients with moderate hepatic impairment, and it has been found not to delay wound healing after orthopedic surgery. More studies are needed to establish its safety and efficacy for use via intrathecal, epidural, or perineural routes. In conclusion, liposomal bupivacaine is effective for treating postoperative pain when used via local infiltration when compared to placebo with a prolonged duration of action, predictable kinetics, and an acceptable side effect profile. However, more adequately powered trials are needed to establish its superiority over plain bupivacaine.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 151 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Romania 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 147 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 22 15%
Student > Master 19 13%
Other 15 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 9%
Other 44 29%
Unknown 23 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 76 50%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 6%
Engineering 6 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 4%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 5 3%
Other 13 9%
Unknown 36 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 22 October 2019.
All research outputs
#3,947,581
of 19,985,377 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#413
of 1,501 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,947
of 335,871 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#7
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,985,377 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,501 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
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 335,871 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.