Anesth Analg 2007;105:176-183
© 2007 International Anesthesia Research Society
doi: 10.1213/01.ane.0000265533.13477.26
OBSTETRIC ANESTHESIOLOGY
Single-Dose, Extended-Release Epidural Morphine (DepoDurTM) Compared to Conventional Epidural Morphine for Post-Cesarean Pain
Brendan Carvalho, MBBCh, FRCA,
Laura M. Roland, MD,
Larry F. Chu, MD, MS,
Vincent A. Campitelli, III, MD, and
Edward T. Riley, MD
From the Department of Anesthesia, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.
Address correspondence and reprint requests to Brendan Carvalho, MBBCh, FRCA, Department of Anesthesia, H3580, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305. Address e-mail to bcarvalho{at}stanford.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A single-dose of neuraxial morphine sulfate provides good post-Cesarean analgesia; however, its efficacy is limited to the first postoperative day. In a recent phase III study, extended-release epidural morphine (EREM) formulation provided more effective, prolonged analgesia after Cesarean delivery, compared to conventional epidural morphine. However, the study protocol did not allow for the use of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, used various postoperative analgesics, and monitoring and treatment of respiratory depression were not standardized. Our aims in this study were to compare postoperative analgesic consumption, pain scores and side effects of EREM with conventional morphine for the management of post-Cesarean pain in a setting more reflective of current obstetric practice.
METHODS: Seventy healthy parturients undergoing elective Cesarean delivery were enrolled in this randomized, double-blind study. Using a combined spinal epidural technique, patients received an intrathecal injection of bupivacaine 12 mg and fentanyl 10 mcg. After closure of the fascia, a single-dose of either conventional morphine 4 mg or EREM 10 mg was administered epidurally. Postoperatively, all patients received ibuprofen 600 mg orally every 6 h. Oral oxycodone and IV morphine were available for breakthrough pain. All patients received pulse oximetry and respiratory monitoring for 48 h post-Cesarean delivery.
RESULTS: Single-dose EREM significantly improved pain scores at rest and during activity. The median (interquartile range) of supplemental opioid medication usage for 48 h post-Cesarean (in milligram-morphine equivalents) decreased from 17 (22) to 10 (17) mg with EREM compared to conventional epidural morphine (P = 0.037). Both drugs were well tolerated with no significant difference in adverse event profiles.
CONCLUSION: EREM provides superior and prolonged post-Cesarean analgesia compared to conventional epidural morphine with no significant increases in adverse events.
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. Macarthur, C. Imarengiaye, L. Tureanu, and K. Downey
A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Epidural Morphine Analgesia After Vaginal Delivery
Anesth. Analg.,
January 1, 2010;
110(1):
159 - 164.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. J. N. Mhuircheartaigh, R. A. Moore, and H. J. McQuay
Analysis of individual patient data from clinical trials: epidural morphine for postoperative pain
Br. J. Anaesth.,
December 1, 2009;
103(6):
874 - 881.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
E. R. Viscusi, D. R. Gambling, T. L. Hughes, and G. Z. Manvelian
Pharmacokinetics of extended-release epidural morphine sulfate: Pooled analysis of six clinical studies
Am. J. Health Syst. Pharm.,
June 1, 2009;
66(11):
1020 - 1030.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
B. Carvalho
Respiratory Depression After Neuraxial Opioids in the Obstetric Setting
Anesth. Analg.,
September 1, 2008;
107(3):
956 - 961.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
B. Roboubi
Extended Release Epidural Morphine, Far from Ideal for Postcesarean Delivery Pain Control
Anesth. Analg.,
December 1, 2007;
105(6):
1864 - 1864.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
B. Carvalho and E. Riley
Extended Release Epidural Morphine, Far from Ideal for Postcesarean Delivery Pain Control
Anesth. Analg.,
December 1, 2007;
105(6):
1864 - 1865.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|