JOURNAL HOME CME HOME THIS MONTH PAST ISSUES ETOC COLLECTIONS
AUTHORS REVIEWERS EDITORIAL BOARD FEEDBACK RSS HELP
A&A International Anesthesia Research Society
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (28)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Slappendel, R.
Right arrow Articles by van Limbeek, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Slappendel, R.
Right arrow Articles by van Limbeek, J.
Anesth Analg 1999;88:822
© 1999 International Anesthesia Research Society

REGIONAL ANESTHESIA AND PAIN MANAGEMENT

Optimization of the Dose of Intrathecal Morphine in Total Hip Surgery: A Dose-Finding Study

Robert Slappendel, MD*, Eric W. G. Weber, MD*, Ris Dirksen, PhD, MD{dagger}, Mathieu J. M. Gielen, PhD, MD{dagger}, and Jacques van Limbeek, PhD, MD*

Departments of Anesthesiology, *Sint Maartenskliniek and {dagger}University Hospital Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Robert Slappendel, MD, Department of Anesthesiology, Sint Maartenskliniek, P.O. Box 9011, 6500 GM Nijmegen, The Netherlands.


   Abstract
Top
 Abstract
Introduction
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
We designed this study to determine the optimal intrathecal dose of morphine in total hip surgery. The optimal intrathecal dose was defined as that providing effective analgesia and minimal side effects 24 h after total hip surgery. Patients (n = 143) scheduled for total hip surgery were randomized to four double-blinded groups with a standardized bupivacaine dose but different doses of intrathecal morphine (Group I = 0.025 mg, Group II = 0.05 mg, Group III = 0.1 mg, and Group IV = 0.2 mg). Pain scores, IV morphine intake (patient-controlled analgesia), and morphine-related side effects (respiratory depression, postoperative nausea and vomiting, itching, urinary retention) were recorded for 24 h after surgery. Excellent postoperative pain relief was present in all groups. The highest pain scores were found in Group I. The mean use of systemic morphine administered by patient-controlled analgesia infusion pump was 23.7, 17.8, 10.9, and 9.9 mg in Groups I—IV, respectively (P < 0.01 for Groups III and IV versus Group I). We conclude that 0.1 mg of intrathecal morphine is the optimal dose for pain relief after hip surgery with minimal side effects.

Implications: Earlier studies showed excellent postoperative pain relief after intrathecal morphine. However, the severity of side effects resulted in decreased enthusiasm for this anesthesia technique. In the present study, we show that an intrathecal dose of 0.1 mg of morphine can be used safely in total hip surgery with excellent postoperative pain relief.


   Introduction
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Many studies (1–4) have shown that the intrathecal administration of morphine provides excellent postoperative pain relief in major orthopedic surgery. However, the use of spinal morphine was often associated with unpleasant side effects, such as urinary retention, pruritus, and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) (5). Moreover, early studies reported late respiratory depression in some cases, but intrathecal doses of morphine as large as 2.5 mg were used (4,6,7).

The water-soluble nature of morphine contributes to the longevity of its analgesic effect and allows the rostral ascent (8,9) that underlies the risk of late respiratory depression. The cerebrospinal fluid opioid concentration is dose-dependent (10), as are both analgesia and respiratory depression (11). Profound and prolonged respiratory depression was reported by Bailey et al. (11) after an intrathecal dose of 0.6 mg, and minimal, yet statistically significant, respiratory depression occurred even after the administration of 0.15 mg of morphine (12).

We hypothesized that even smaller doses might further minimize side effects but were unsure whether these doses would offer the desired analgesic effect. Therefore, we performed a randomized, double-blinded trial to establish the optimal dose of intrathecal morphine that effectively relieves pain after total hip surgery and to evaluate whether the smallest effective dose indeed coincides with minimized side effects.


   Methods
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Methods
Results
 Discussion
 References
 
The study was approved by the ethical committee of our hospital, and written, informed consent was obtained from all patients. One hundred forty-three consecutive patients (ASA physical status I–III) scheduled for total hip surgery during intrathecal anesthesia were included in the study in a prospective, randomized, double-blinded manner.

All patients were premedicated with 5, 7.5, or 10 mg of midazolam (0.1 mg/kg) orally 1 h before spinal anesthesia. Intrathecal anesthesia (27-gauge Quincke needle) was produced by administering 20 mg of bupivacaine plus morphine dissolved in 4 mL. Patients were allocated to four groups: Group I = 0.025 mg, Group II = 0.05 mg, Group III = 0.1 mg and Group IV = 0.2 mg of morphine. The delivered morphine dose was known to the pharmacist in case of an adverse event.

The anesthesiologist administered 1 mg of midazolam at the minimal interval of 5 min until the patient indicated that the desired sedation was achieved. Noninvasive blood pressure, heart rate (electrocardiogram), oxygen saturation (SpO2), and respiratory frequency were continuously monitored during anesthesia and in the intensive care unit during the first 24 h after surgery.

In the postoperative period, all patients were treated with the nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug nabumeton 1500 or 2000 mg orally (first dose 1 h before surgery), one dose a day (30 mg/kg). If nabumeton was contraindicated, oral paracetamol was given (70 mg/kg six times a day). Pain was evaluated using visual analog scores (VAS). VAS ranges from 0 to 10, with 0 = no pain and 10 = most severe pain. For each individual patient, we assessed the highest VAS score in the 24-h period and total pain VAS scores (area under the curve of VAS scores in the 24-h period). If pain was present, morphine was administered IV by a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) pump (Braun, Melsungen, Germany). The settings of the PCA pump were baseline 0.0 mg/h, bolus dose 1.0 mg, bolus interval 5 min, maximum 30-mg dose per 4 h.

PONV was treated according to the standard protocol. The first step was 10 mg of metoclopramide IM, followed by 10 mg of metoclopramide IM after 1 h when necessary. If symptoms persisted, 1.25 mg of droperidol was given, and finally 5 mg of tropisetron, both IV. Each step was initiated by patient request. The minimal interval between each step was 1 h. PONV was evaluated from the following data: the patient’s subjective feeling (the presence or absence of subjective nausea), the patient’s request to be treated with an antiemetic, and the actual consumption of antiemetics.

Other side effects scored in the postoperative period included respiratory depression (defined as <10 breaths/min and arterial blood gas showing acidosis and hypercarbia), itching (by specific inquiry and recording of the antipruritic medication promethazine), urinary retention (defined as absence of spontaneous voiding 7 h after surgery and volume at catheterization of >400 mL), hypotension (>25% reduction of preoperative mean arterial blood pressure), and bradycardia (heart rate <40 bpm). The presence or absence of any of these side effects was noted at 3-h intervals during the 24-h observation period. The medication for treatment of any of these side effects was also registered at the same intervals during the 24-h observation period.

Analysis of interval scored data was performed by using analysis of variance techniques or t-tests (paired or unpaired depending on data structure). Nonparametric techniques (Kruskall-Wallis) were used when necessary. Post hoc analysis was performed by using the Duncan test with significance level of P = 0.05. Proportions were analyzed with {chi}2 statistics and Fischer’s exact test. The {alpha} level for all analysis was set as P = 0.05. Data are reported as means ± SD.


   Results
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Methods
 Results
Discussion
 References
 
Demographic data and intraoperative factors are given in Table 1. The four groups did not differ in age, height, weight, or gender. The patient groups were also not different in any other characteristics, e.g., the preoperative use of ß-blockers, the magnitude of blood loss during surgery, the percentage of patients who required sedation during surgery, use of cementation, and concurrent decrease in arterial blood pressure.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 1. Demographic Data and Intraoperative Factors
 
The VAS scores were <3 in the postoperative period in all patients in all four groups (Fig. 1). The highest VAS score of each individual patient in the 24-h period and total pain VAS scores area under the curve of VAS scores in the 24-h period were highest for Group I (Fig. 2). These higher VAS scores were associated with a significantly higher consumption of systemic morphine in Group I. The mean use of systemic morphine administered by the PCA infusion pump was 23.7, 17.8, 10.9, and 9.9 mg in Groups I—Iv, respectively (Group I different from Groups III and IV; P < 0.01).



View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 1. Visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores during the 24 h after surgery given as mean. *P < 0.01, Fisher’s exact test.

 


View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 2. Pain scores and morphine use. VAS = visual analog scale, AUC = area under the curve, PCA = patient-controlled analgesia. **Statistical difference between Group IV and Group I and II (P < 0.0001).

 
The incidences of PONV and urinary retention and consumption of antiemetics were not different among the groups (Fig. 2). The mean number of antiemetics used in all patients was 1.2 ± 1.1, 1.2 ± 1.3, 1.1 ± 1.2, and 1.3 ± 1.2 in Groups I–IV, respectively. PONV occurred at a higher overall incidence during the first 24 h after surgery in women than in men (77% vs 44%; P < 0.05).

No patient had a respiratory rate <10 breaths/min. Arterial oxygen saturation was monitored continuously. The SpO2 of all patients increased when oxygen was administered (3 L/min by nasal catheter) (Fig. 3). Arterial blood gases sampled at such desaturations <90% did not show acidosis.



View larger version (44K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 3. Incidence of side effects during the first 24 h after surgery. PONV = postoperative nausea and vomiting. *P < 0.05.

 
The incidence of itching was dose-related, as was the incidence of request for antipruritic medication.

Heart rates decreased 6%–16% in all groups after anesthesia, returning to baseline levels 12 h postoperatively. The incidence of hypotension was 48.6%, 56.8%, 54.0%, and 73.5% in Groups I–IV, respectively (significantly different for Group III and IV; P < 0.05).


   Discussion
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
References
 
The major finding of this study is that the optimal dose of intrathecal morphine after total hip surgery is as low as 0.1 mg (Group III). This dose resulted in excellent pain relief and a low demand for systemic morphine in the first 24 h after surgery. The larger dose of 0.2 mg of intrathecal morphine did not produce better analgesia; moreover, the incidence of itching was higher and the degree of hypotension more profound and longer lasting. Intrathecal morphine doses <0.1 mg were less effective.

Many studies have evaluated the effects of intrathecal morphine for postoperative pain relief after surgery (1–4). These studies (3,4,6) used larger doses of morphine (up to 2.5 mg) or included patients undergoing different types of surgery (6). In our study, the site and type of surgery was restricted to total hip replacement. Adequacy of morphine is reflected by VAS scores and systemic morphine demand from a PCA pump. After the 0.1-mg intrathecal morphine dose, postoperative pain was effectively relieved during the first 24 h.

PONV showed similar overall incidences in all groups. In this study, we confirm the high incidence of PONV after orthopedic surgery (13,14). PONV was not induced by these small doses of intrathecal morphine, as found in our earlier study (13).

A major concern with intrathecal morphine is respiratory depression. Intrathecal morphine has been shown to cause significant dose-related decreases in SpO2 in human volunteers after doses of 0.2–0.6 mg (11). The time to depression of the slope of the ventilatory response to carbon dioxide curve show peak respiratory depressant effects after lumbar intrathecal morphine administration that concur with the moment of highest cervical cerebrospinal fluid concentrations found in another study (8,9): i.e., approximately 4–5 h after injection. After the smallest dose evaluated in this study (0.2 mg), mild respiratory depression effects were found under laboratory conditions (11). Whether similar changes in respiration were present in our clinical study is unclear. Likewise, others have failed to identify signs of respiratory depression in clinical conditions, provided that the intrathecal dose of morphine is restricted to <0.15 mg (12). The inability to correlate such mild respiratory depressant effects with small intrathecal doses of morphine may well relate to the fact that a decrease in SpO2 is a common phenomenon in elderly patients after both general and intrathecal anesthesia (15). Not only intrathecal morphine, but also a whole array of anesthetic drugs, can contribute to respiratory depression. In a recent study, eight cases of serious respiratory depression were detected from the charts of approximately 1600 patients who had received systemic morphine by PCA (16). Our elderly patients were premedicated and sedated with midazolam, IV morphine was administered by PCA pump, and systemic antiemetic drugs (droperidol and/or metoclopramide) were used in the postoperative period. Yet, the magnitude and incidence of decreases in oxygen saturation were similar to those reported in another postoperative study in elderly patients not exposed to intrathecal morphine (15). The key question is whether respiration after a total hip procedure is more affected when intrathecal morphine is used than when it is not. We show that the mild respiratory depressant effects after the administration of 0.2 mg of morphine intrathecally represent an effect at a dose twice as large as that we defined as optimal. Any anesthesia technique affects respiration, and one can always argue that very large numbers of patients must be studied to be sure that there is no respiratory depression after an intrathecal dose of 0.1 mg of morphine. Monitoring in intensive care units is not required because of the administration of 0.1 mg of intrathecal morphine, even in the opiate-naive, elderly patient. Another dose-related intrathecal morphine side effect is itching, but it is easy to manage with a single dose of promethazine when necessary.

Patients in all groups showed, as expected, a decrease of heart rate and blood pressure after intrathecal anesthesia with bupivacaine and morphine (14). Only one patient in Group I (the smallest dose of intrathecal morphine) had bradycardia. The decrease in blood pressure after the administration of .2 mg of intrathecal morphine was more profound and longer lasting. In our earlier study (13), we found that 16% of patients developed bradycardia when the effect of intrathecal bupivacaine without morphine subsided in the postoperative period.

In summary, the intrathecal dose of 0.1 mg of morphine added to bupivacaine provides excellent postoperative analgesia for total hip surgery. The larger doses of intrathecal morphine used earlier (2,4,6) (>0.2–2.5 mg) were more effective and can cause unnecessary and dangerous side effects. We believe that 0.1 mg of intrathecal morphine added to bupivacaine provides excellent postoperative analgesia in the first 24-h, assists in hemodynamic stability, and does not cause significant respiratory depression. Finally, after this intrathecal morphine dose, there seems to be no need for routine intensive care-based recovery, even in elderly patients.


   References
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 

  1. Domsky M, Kwartowitz J. Efficacy of subarachnoid morphine in a community hospital. Reg Anesth 1992;17:279–82.[Web of Science][Medline]
  2. Kalso E. Effects of intrathecal morphine, injected with bupivacaine, on pain after orthopedic surgery. Br J Anaesth 1983;55:415–21.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Grace D, Fee JPH. A comparison of intrathecal morphine-6-glucuronide and intrathecal morphine sulfate as analgesics for total hip replacement. Analg 1996;83:1055–9.[Abstract]
  4. Reay BA, Semple AJ, Macrae WA, et al. Low dose intrathecal diamorphine analgesia following major orthopedic surgery. Anaesth 1989;62:248–52.
  5. Cousins MJ, Mather LE. Intrathecal and epidural administration of opioids. Anesthesiology 1984;61:276–310.[Web of Science][Medline]
  6. Jacobson L, Chabal C, Brody MC. A dose response study of intrathecal morphine: efficacy, duration, optimal dose, and side effects. Anesth Analg 1988;67:1082–8.[Web of Science][Medline]
  7. Gustafsson LL, Schildt B, Jacobsen KJ. Adverse effects of extradural and intrathecal opiates: report of a nation-wide survey in Sweden. Br J Anaesth 1982;54:479–86.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Max MB, Inturrisi CE, Kaiko RF, et al. Epidural and intrathecal opiates: cerebrospinal fluid and plasma profiles in patients with chronic cancer pain. Ther 1985;38:631–41.
  9. Payne R, Inturrisi CE. CSF distribution of morphine, methadone and sucrose after intrathecal injection. Life Sci 1985;37:1137–44.[Web of Science][Medline]
  10. Nordberg G, Hedner T, Mellstrand T, Dahlström B. Pharmacokinetic aspects of intrathecal morphine analgesia. Anesthesiology 1984;60:448–54.[Web of Science][Medline]
  11. Bailey PL, Rhondeau S, Schafer PG, et al. Dose response pharmacology of intrathecal morphine in human volunteers. Anesthesiology 1993;79:49–59.[Web of Science][Medline]
  12. Yamaguchi H, Watanabe S, Motokawa K, Ishizawa Y. Intrathecal morphine dose response data for pain relief after cholecystectomy. Anesth Analg 1990;70:168–71.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Weber EWG, Slappendel R, Gielen MJM, Dirksen R. Intrathecal addition of morphine to bupivacaine is not the cause of postoperative nausea or vomiting. Reg Anesth Pain Med 1998;23:81–6.[Web of Science][Medline]
  14. Carpenter RL, Caplan RA, Brown DL, et al. Incidence and risk factors for side effects of spinal anesthesia. Anesthesiology 1992;76:906–16.[Web of Science][Medline]
  15. Brown AG, Visram AR, Jones RDM, et al. Preoperative and postoperative oxygen saturation in the elderly following spinal or general anaesthesia: an audit of current practice. Anaesth Intensive Care 1994;22:150–4.[Web of Science][Medline]
  16. Etches R. Respiratory depression associated with patient controlled analgesia: a review of eight cases. Can J Anaesth 1994;41:125–32.[Web of Science][Medline]
Accepted for publication January 7, 1999.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
S. Eschertzhuber, M. Hohlrieder, C. Keller, E. Oswald, G. Kuehbacher, and P. Innerhofer
Comparison of high- and low-dose intrathecal morphine for spinal fusion in children
Br. J. Anaesth., April 1, 2008; 100(4): 538 - 543.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
J. L. Parlow, I. Costache, N. Avery, and K. Turner
Single-Dose Haloperidol for the Prophylaxis of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting After Intrathecal Morphine
Anesth. Analg., April 1, 2004; 98(4): 1072 - 1076.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
P. M. Murphy, D. Stack, B. Kinirons, and J. G. Laffey
Optimizing the Dose of Intrathecal Morphine in Older Patients Undergoing Hip Arthroplasty
Anesth. Analg., December 1, 2003; 97(6): 1709 - 1715.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
P. J. Cole, D. A. Craske, and R. G. Wheatley
Efficacy and respiratory effects of low-dose spinal morphine for postoperative analgesia following knee arthroplasty
Br. J. Anaesth., August 1, 2000; 85(2): 233 - 237.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
H. Toyoyama, K. Mizutani, Y. Toyoda, R. Slappendel, B. Benraad, R. Dirksen, E. W. G. Weber, M. J. M. Gielen, and J. van Limbeek
One Drop of Morphine Added to Local Anesthetics by Means of a 23-Gauge Injection Needle Can Relieve Postoperative Pain Under Spinal Anesthesia • Response
Anesth. Analg., April 1, 2000; 90(4): 1000 - 1000.
[Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (28)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Slappendel, R.
Right arrow Articles by van Limbeek, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Slappendel, R.
Right arrow Articles by van Limbeek, J.

Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins Anesthesia & Analgesia® is published for the International Anesthesia Research Society® by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins with the assistance of Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press®. Copyright 2006 by the International Anesthesia Research Society. Online ISSN: 1526-7598   Print ISSN: 0003-2999 HighWire Press