Design of the multicenter Australian study of epidural anesthesia and analgesia in major surgery: The MASTER Trial

The Multicenter Australian Study of Epidural Anesthesia and Analgesia in Major Surgery (The MASTER Trial) was designed to evaluate the possible benefit of epidural block in improving outcome in high-risk patients. The trial began in 1995 and is scheduled to reach the planned sample size of 900 during 2001. This paper describes the trial design and presents data comparing 455 patients randomized in 21 institutions in Australia, Hong Kong, and Malaysia, with 237 patients from the same hospitals who were eligible but not randomized. Nine categories of high-risk patients were defined as entry criteria for the trial. Protocols for ethical review, informed consent, randomization, clinical anesthesia and analgesia, and perioperative management were determined following extensive consultation with anesthesiologists throughout Australia. Clinical and research information was collected in participating hospitals by research staff who may not have been blind to allocation. Decisions about the presence or absence of endpoints were made primarily by a computer algorithm, supplemented by blinded clinical experts. Without unblinding the trial, comparison of eligibility criteria and incidence of endpoints between randomized and nonrandomized patients showed only small differences. We conclude that there is no strong evidence of important demographic or clinical differences between randomized and nonrandomized patients eligible for the MASTER Trial. Thus, the trial results are likely to be broadly generalizable. Control Clin Trials 2000;21:244-256 (C) Elsevier Science Inc. 2000.

Epidural anaesthesia and analgesia and outcome of major surgery: a randomised trial

Background Epidural block is widely used to manage major abdominal surgery and postoperative analgesia, but its risks. and benefits are uncertain. We compared adverse outcomes in high-risk patients managed for major surgery with epidural block or alternative analgesic regimens with general anaesthesia in a multicentre randomised trial. Methods 915 patients undergoing major abdominal surgery with one of nine defined comorbid states to identify high-risk status were randomly assigned intraoperative epidural anaesthesia and postoperative epidural analgesia for 72 h with general anaesthesia (site of epidural selected to provide optimum block) or control. The primary endpoint was death at 30 days or major postsurgical morbidity. Analysis by intention to treat involved 447 patients assigned epidural and 441 control. Findings 255 patients (57.1%) in the epidural group and 268 (60.7%) in the control group had at least one morbidity endpoint or died (p=0.29). Mortality at 30 days was low in both groups (epidural 23 [5.1%], control 19 [4.3%], p=0.67). Only one of eight categories of morbid endpoints in individual systems (respiratory failure) occurred less frequently in patients managed with epidural techniques (23% vs 30%, p=0.02). Postoperative epidural analgesia was associated with lower pain scores during the first 3 postoperative days. There were no major adverse consequences of epidural-catheter insertion. Interpretation Most adverse morbid outcomes in high-risk patients undergoing major abdominal surgery are not reduced by use of combined epidural and general anaesthesia and postoperative epidural analgesia. However, the improvement in analgesia, reduction in respiratory failure, and the low risk of serious adverse consequences suggest that many high-risk patients undergoing major intra-abdominal surgery will receive substantial benefit from combined general and epidural anaesthesia intraoperatively with continuing postoperative epidural analgesia.

Perioperative epidural analgesia and outcome after major abdominal surgery in high-risk patients

In a primary analysis of a large recently completed randomized trial in 915 high-risk patients undergoing major abdominal surgery, we found no difference in outcome between patients receiving perioperative epidural analgesia and those receiving IV opioids, apart from the incidence of respiratory failure. Therefore, we performed a selected number of predetermined subgroup analyses to identify specific types of patients who may have derived benefit from epidural analgesia. We found no difference in outcome between epidural and control groups in subgroups at increased risk of respiratory or cardiac complications or undergoing aortic surgery, nor in a subgroup with failed epidural block (all P > 0.05). There was a small reduction in the duration of postoperative ventilation (geometric mean [SD]: control group, 0.3 [6.5] h, versus epidural group, 0.2 [4.8] h, P = 0.048). No differences were found in length of stay in intensive care or in the hospital. There was no relationship between frequency of use of epidural analgesia in routine practice outside the trial and benefit from epidural analgesia in the trial. We found no evidence that perioperative epidural analgesia significantly influences major morbidity or mortality after major abdominal surgery.

Effect of maternal epidural analgesia on fetal intrapartum oxygen saturation

The use of maternal epidural analgesia in labor may be associated with nonreassuring fetal heart rate (FHR) patterns. Fetal oxygen saturation (FSpO(2)) monitoring may improve assessment of fetal well-being during this time. Mean FSpO(2) values were compared over seven 5-minute epochs: 5 minutes prior to an epidural event (combined insertion of epidural/top-up epidural analgesia and infusion pump bolus), to 30 minutes following the event, including possible effects of maternal position and FHR pattern on FSpO(2) values. Mean FSpO(2) values were significantly different between the 5 minutes prior (49.5%) versus 16-20 minutes (44.3%, p

The prevalence and impact of overweight and obesity in an Australian obstetric population

Objective: To assess the prevalence and impact of overweight and obesity in an Australian obstetric population. Design, setting and participants: The Mater Mother's Hospital (MMH), South Brisbane, is an urban tertiary referral maternity hospital. We reviewed data for the 18401 women who were booked for antenatal care at the MMH, delivered between January 1998 and December 2002, and had a singleton pregnancy. Of those women, 14 230 had an estimated pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI) noted in their record; 2978 women with BMI 40 kg/m(2)). Main outcome measures: Prevalence of overweight and obesity in an obstetric population; maternal, peripartum and neonatal outcomes associated with raised BMI. Results: Of the 14230 women, 6443 (45%) were of normal weight, and 4809 (34%) were overweight, obese or morbidly obese. Overweight, obese and morbidly obese women were at increased risk of adverse outcomes (figures represent adjusted odds ratio [AOR] [95% Cl]): hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (overweight 1.74 [1.45-2.15], obese 3.00 [2.40-3.74], morbidly obese 4.87 [3.27-7.24]); gestational diabetes (overweight 1.78 [1.25-2.52], obese 2.95 [2.05-4.25], morbidly obese 7.44 [4.42-12.54]); hospital admission longer than 5 days (overweight 1.36 [1.13-1.63], obese 1.49 [1.21-1.86], morbidly obese 3.18 [2.19-4.61]); and caesarean section (overweight 1.50 [1.36-1.66], obese 2.02 [1.79-2.29], morbidly obese 2.54 [1.94-3.321). Neonates born to obese and morbidly obese women had an increased risk of birth defects (obese 1.58 (1.02-2.46], morbidly obese 3.41 [1.67-6.94]); and hypoglycaemia (obese 2.57 [1.39-4.78], morbidly obese 7.14 [3.04-16.74]). Neonates born to morbidly obese women were at increased risk of admission to intensive care (2.77 [1.81-4.25]); premature delivery (< 34 weeks' gestation) (2.13 [1.13-4.01]); and jaundice (1.44 [1.09-1.89]). Conclusions: Overweight and obesity are common in pregnant women. Increasing BMI is associated with maternal and neonatal outcomes that may increase the costs of obstetric care. To assist in planning health service delivery, we believe that BMI should be routinely recorded on perinatal data collection sheets

Investigation of the antinociceptive efficacy and relative potency of extended duration injectable 3-acylmorphine-6-sulfate prodrugs in rats

This investigation was designed to examine the antinociceptive activity in rats of 3-O-acyl prodrugs of M6S relative to the parent drug, after intravenous and intramuscular injection, using the tail flick latency test of antinociception. M6S, 3-acetylmorphine-6-sulfate (3AcM6S), 3-propionylmorphine-6-sulfate (3PrM6S), 3-butanoylmorphine-6-sulfate (3BuM6S) and 3-heptanoylmorphine-6-sulfate (3HpM6S) were administered by the IV route in a dose of 4.10 mu mol/kg. Relatively high levels of antinociception (>40% Maximum Possible Effect) were achieved following administration of M6S, 3AcM6S and 3PrM6S, whereas insignificant antinociception (<20%MPE) was achieved following administration of 3BuM6S or 3HpM6S. Although the mean duration of action for 3AcM6S (6 h) was longer than for M6S or 3PrM6S (4 h), the mean area (+/- S.E.M.) under the degree of antinociception versus time curve (AUG) for 3AcM6S (151.6 +/- 6.9%MPE h) was not significantly different (p <0.05) from that for M6S (120.8 +/- 32.7%MPE h) or for 3PrM6S (106.0 +/- 21.3%MPE h). The mean ED50 (range) doses for M6S, 3AcM6S and 3PrM6S were calculated to be 4.16 (3.61-4.48), 4.32 (3.55-5.09) and 4.54 (4.21-4.79) mu mol/kg, respectively. Preliminary studies were conducted on potential long-acting formulations containing 8 x ED50 doses of M6S and the 3-acetyl and 3-propionyl esters suspended in soybean oil. These showed that 3PrM6S gave a greater AUC (mean + S.E.M.) (1087.4 +/- 97.4%MPE h) and longer duration of action (20 h) than did M6S (613.1 +/- 155.9%MPE h; 10 h duration) or 3AcM6S (379.3 + 114.2%MPE h: 8 h duration). Further studies are needed to more fully investigate these findings. (C) 1998 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

The excitatory behavioral and antianalgesic pharmacology of normorphine-3-glucuronide after intracerebroventricular administration to rats

In the adult male Sprague-Dawley rat, a species commonly used to study tolerance to the antinociceptive effects of morphine, approximate to 10% of the morphine dose is metabolized to normorphine-3-glucuronide (NM3G). In contrast, NM3G is a relatively minor metabolite of morphine in human urine reportedly accounting for approximate to 1% of the morphine dose. To date, the pharmacology of NM3G has been poorly characterized. Therefore, our studies were designed to determine whether the intrinsic pharmacology of NM3G is similar to that of morphine-3-glucuronide (M3G), the major metabolite of morphine, which has been shown to be a potent central nervous system (CNS) excitant and to attenuate the intrinsic antinociceptive effects of morphine in rats. The CNS excitatory potency of NM3G was found to be approximately half that of M3G, inducing convulsions in rats at intracerebroventricular (i.c.v.) doses of greater than or equal to 16.8 nmol. When administered before morphine (70 nmol i.c.v.), NM3G (8.9 nmol i.c.v.) attenuated antinociception for up to 2 hr, but when administered after morphine, no significant attenuation of morphine antinociception was observed. Thus, after i.c.v. administration, NM3G like M3G, is a potent CNS excitant and antianalgesic in the rat. NM3G may therefore play a role in the development of tolerance to the antinociceptive effects of morphine in the rat as has been proposed previously for M3G.