Profilaxia do prurido causado pela administração subaracnóidea de sufentanil: efeitos do droperidol, da nalbufina, do ondansetron e da combinação deles

JUSTIFICATIVA E OBJETIVOS: O uso espinhal de opióides pode causar alguns efeitos indesejáveis, dentre os quais, o mais freqüente é o prurido que, apesar de sua baixa morbidade, pode proporcionar desconforto intenso ao paciente e prolongar o período de internação. O objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar diversas opções terapêuticas no tratamento profilático do prurido após administração de sufentanil por via subaracnóidea. MÉTODO: Foram distribuídos de maneira aleatória, por sorteio, 100 pacientes a serem submetidos à intervenção cirúrgica não-obstétricas em cinco grupos, de acordo com o tratamento utilizado: controle (ausência de tratamento - C); droperidol 2,5 mg (D); nalbufina 10 mg (N); associação dos medicamentos anteriores (DN) e ondansetron 8 mg (O). O prurido foi avaliado quantitativamente 30 minutos, 1, 2, e 3 horas após a administração subaracnóidea de sufentanil. RESULTADOS: Os grupos C e O apresentaram incidência significativamente maior de prurido em relação aos grupos D, N e DN. Entretanto, não houve diferença significativa na necessidade de tratamento específico com naloxona entre os grupos tratados. CONCLUSÕES: O tratamento profilático do prurido neste estudo, independentemente do fármaco utilizado, diminuiu sua intensidade e limitou a necessidade de tratamento específico com naloxona.

Efeitos adversos do sufentanil associado ao anestésico local pelas vias subaracnóidea e peridural em pacientes submetidas à analgesia de parto

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)

Associacao de opioides lipofilicos a bupivacaina na anestesia peridural. Ha vantagem no aumento da dose do opioide?

Background and Objectives: - The effects of associating lipophilic opioids to local anesthetics in epidural anesthesia are not well defined. There are still questions and controversies about opioid doses to be used and their major effects in the epidural block. This study aimed at evaluating the epidural block effects in humans of the association of different fentanyl and sufentanil doses to bupivacaine with 1:200.000 epinephrine. Methods: - A double-blind randomized study was performed in 94 patients of both genders, physical status ASA I, aged between 18 and 60 years, submitted to lower abdomen, perineal or lower limb surgery. Patients without preanesthetic medication were epidurally injected with 100 mg (20 ml) 0.5% bupivacaine, 0.1 mg (0.1 ml) 1%o epinephrine plus a combination of the following drugs: BUPI Group (15 patients): 2 ml of 0.9% saline solution (SS); FENT50 Group (19 patients): 50 μg (1 ml) fentanyl + 1 ml SS; FENT100 Group (20 patients): 100 μg (2 ml) fentanyl; SUF30 Group (20 patients): 30 μg (0.6 ml) sufentanil + SS (1.4 ml); SUF100 Group (20 patients): 50 μg (1 ml) sufentanil + SS (1 ml). The following parameters were studied: onset of sensory block, analgesic block (onset time) in T12, T10 and T8, analgesic block duration in T10 and T12, motor block degree, consciousness degree, need for supplemental perioperative sedation and analgesia, hypotension, bradycardia and peri and post operative side-effects, analgesia duration, proportion of patients needing supplemental analgesia and evaluation of postoperative pain (pain analog visual scale). Results: Groups were demographically uniform. The addition of fentanyl or sufentanil did not alter major characteristics of perioperative epidural block and has not significantly increased postoperative analgesia duration as compared to the use of bupivacaine only. However, the addition of lipophilic opioids has increased the quality of perioperative anesthetic block, translated into a lesser need for supplemental analgesia (p < 0.02). The increased dose of fentanyl and especially of sufentanil has increased the incidence of perioperative drowsiness (p < 0.001) without significant increase in other side effects. Conclusions: In the conditions and doses used, the addition of lipophilic opioids to bupivacaine and the increased dose of lipophilic opioids have improved anesthetic block quality without changes in the epidural block characteristics or a significant increase in side effects, with the exception of drowsiness mainly caused by sufentanil. However, they were not able to provide a significant increase in postoperative analgesia duration.

Comparacao da recuperacao de anestesia venosa com propofol e anestesia inalatoria com sevoflurano para laparoscopia ginecologica

Backgrounds and Objectives: Both continuous venous anesthesia with propofol and inhalational anesthesia with sevoflurane propitiate fast arousal with few side effects. The aim of this study was to compare the arousal and post anesthestic recovery times in patients submitted to these two agents. Methods: Forty three patient aged 18 to 50 years, physical status I or II, submitted to gynecological laparoscopy were distributed in two groups: G1 - propofol in continuous infusion of 115 μg.kg -1.min -1 and G2 sevoflurane. All the patients were pre-medicated with 7.5 mg midazolam, sufentanil 0.5 μg.kg -1, propofol 2 mg.kg -1, atracurium 0.5 mg.kg -1, N 2O in 50% of oxygen in a no-rebreathing system. The depth of the anesthesia and arousal time were assessed by the Bispectral index (BIS). The time between end of anesthesia and eye opening, time for command response and time for orientation were also evaluated. Results: The times recorded in minutes were: G1 - eye opening 8.2 ± 2.9, command response 8.6 ± 3.1, orientation 9.8 ± 3.4, recovery 31.6 ± 3.8; G2 - eye opening 4.5 ± 3, command response 4.9 ± 3.4, orientation 6.2 ± 3.4, recovery 66 ± 8. Except the recovery time, all the values were larger in G1. Conclusions: Both intravenous propofol or inhalational sevoflurane were considered excellent anesthetic techniques as to recovery time and recovery room discharge. Sevoflurane provided an earlier arousal with a longer recovery room stay as compared to propofol.

Morfina nasal: Avaliacao da analgesia e dos efeitos colaterais no tratamento da dor pos-operatoria em criancas

Background and Objectives - Postoperative pain is one of the major discomforts but often under treated, especially in the pediatric patient. The aim of this study was to evaluate nasal morphine postoperative analgesia as an alternative drug administration route and show its applicability, effectiveness, tolerability and side effects. Methods - Participated in this study 20 patients aged 3 to 13 years, physical status ASA I and II sequentially submitted the different small and medium-size surgeries. Analgesia was obtained with nasal morphine hydrochloride in aqueous solution in variable concentrations of 2%, 1%, 0.5%, 0.25% and 0.125%. The dose for each instillation has been 0.1 mg.kg -1 at three-hour intervals for 36 postoperative hours. Quality of analgesia in pre-verbal age patients was evaluated by a pain intensity scale based on facial expression and crying, sleep, motor activity, sociability and food ingestion was used. Standardized evaluations were performed at 3-hour intervals. A four-grade scale was used to evaluate tolerability, where: 1) Good; 2) Regular; 3) Bad; 4) Very bad. Result - Postoperative analgesia results have proven to be good and safe, especially from the third evaluation on (6 hours). Drug tolerability has been good, although side effects were observed, especially nausea and vomiting. Conclusions - Patients and relatives accepted the method very well. The nasal route was considered an adequate way for opioid administration although more studies are needed to accept it as a routine for postoperative morphine analgesia.

Neurological drugs and opioids for pain management

20.1 Epilepsy and an introduction to drugs used to treat 20.1.1 Introduction to epilepsy 20.1.2 Treatment of partial seizures 20.1.3 Treatment of generalised seizures 20.1.4 Treatment of status epilepticus 20.2 Neurodegenerative disorders; principles of treatment 20.2.1 Introduction to neurodegenerative disorders 20.2.2 Parkinson’s disease 20.2.2.1 Introduction to Parkinson’s disease 20.2.2.2 Dopaminergic system 20.2.2.3 Treatment to enhance the dopaminergic system 20.2.2.4 Treatment to inhibit the cholinergic system 20.2.3 Dementia/Alzheimer’s disease 20.2.3.1 Introduction to Alzheimer’s disease 20.2.3.2 Treatment of Alzheimer’s disease 20.2.4 Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis 43.4.1 Introduction 43.4.2 Treatment 20.3. Pain and opioid analgesics 20.3.1 Introduction to pain and analgesia 20.3.2 Introduction to opioids 20.3.3 Tolerance and physical dependence 20.3.4 Effects of opioids 20.3.5 Agonists at opioid μ receptors 20.3.6 Toxicity to opioids This section deals with the neurologic drugs. The neurologic drugs are used to treat epilepsy and neurodegenerative diseases such as Parkinson’s disease and Alzheimer’s disease. The opioids for pain management are also discussed in this section.

The lipophilic opioids: Fentanyl, alfentanil, sufentanil and remifentanil

discusses fentanyl, alfentanil, sufentanil, and remifentanil which are synthetic opioid analgesics with high affinity for the mu opioid receptor. They have been widely adopted in anaesthetic practice for various surgical procedures (e.g. in cardiac surgery) and for long-term analgesia and sedation. Important pharmacokinetic differences between these analgesics have been described, and this chapter addresses how the pharmacokinetic profile of each analgesic is affected by many factors, including patient age, plasma protein content, acid–base balance status, cardiopulmonary bypass, changes in hepatic blood flow, and the co-administration of other drugs which compete for plasma protein carriers and metabolic pathways, although their profile is not significantly affected by renal insufficiency or compensated hepatic dysfunction, which has major clinical implications.

Low Molecular Weight Opioid Peptide Esters Could be Developed as a New Class of Analgesics.

Low molecular weight opioid peptide esters (OPE) could become a class of analgesics with different side effect profiles than current opiates. OPE may have sufficient plasma stability to cross the blood brain barrier (BBB), undergo ester hydrolysis and produce analgesia. OPE of dipeptides, tyr-pro and tyr-gly conjugated to ethanol have a structure similar to the anesthestic agent, etomidate. Based upon the analgesic activity of dipeptide opioids, Lipinski's criteria, and permeability of select GABA esters to cross the BBB, opioid peptides (OP) conjugated to ethanol, cholesterol or 3-glucose are lead recommendations. Preliminary animal data suggests that tyr-pro-ethyl ester crosses the BBB and unexpectedly produces hyperalgesia. Currently, there are no approved OP analgesics available for clinical use. Clinical trials of good manufacturing practice OP administered to patients suffering from chronic pain with indwelling intrathecal pumps could resolve the issue that OP may be superior to opiates and may redirect research.

Utilization of analgesics, sedatives, and pain scores in infants with a prolonged hospitlaization: A prospective descriptive cohort study

Aim
Describe the utilization of analgesic and sedative medications and documentation of pain scores in a cohort of critically ill infants in a neonatal intensive care unit.

Method
A prospective, longitudinal, cohort study of infants with a predicted length of stay =28 days. Dosages and routes of administration of analgesic and sedative medications and documentation of pain scores were collected on a daily basis.

Results
55 infants were enrolled into the study. Oral sucrose was administered to all 55 infants, 51 infants (93%) were administered enteral acetaminophen and 50 (91%) infants were administered morphine during their hospitalization. Sedatives were administered to 42 infants (76%); 36 (65%) were administered chloral hydrate and 32 (58%) were administered intravenous midazolam. With the exception of the first week of admission, when there was highest utilization of opioids and lower use of sucrose, acetaminophen and sedatives, the pattern of administration of analgesic and sedative agents remained relatively constant throughout the hospitalization. Pain scores were documented for 36 (65%) infants during their hospitalisation, however for these 36 infants, pain scores were infrequently recorded.

Conclusion
There was substantial and varied analgesic and sedative use in this cohort of infants, yet infrequent documentation of pain assessment scores. These practices highlight important clinical implications for sick infants requiring careful consideration of pain and distress management.

Current attitudes regarding the use of perioperative analgesics in dogs and cats by Brazilian veterinarians

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)

Oral or transdermal opioids for osteoarthritis of the knee or hip

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis is the most common form of joint disease and the leading cause of pain and physical disability in the elderly. Opioids may be a viable treatment option if patients suffer from severe pain or if other analgesics are contraindicated. However, the evidence about their effectiveness and safety is contradictory. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects on pain and function and the safety of oral or transdermal opioids as compared with placebo or no intervention in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL (up to 28 July 2008), checked conference proceedings, reference lists, and contacted authors. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies were included if they were randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared oral or transdermal opioids with placebo or no treatment in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee or hip. Studies of tramadol were excluded. No language restrictions were applied. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data in duplicate. Standardised mean differences (SMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for pain and function, and risk ratios for safety outcomes. Trials were combined using inverse-variance random-effects meta-analysis. MAIN RESULTS: Ten trials with 2268 participants were included. Oral codeine was studied in three trials, transdermal fentanyl and oral morphine in one trial each, oral oxycodone in four, and oral oxymorphone in two trials. Overall, opioids were more effective than control interventions in terms of pain relief (SMD -0.36, 95% CI -0.47 to -0.26) and improvement of function (SMD -0.33, 95% CI -0.45 to -0.21). We did not find substantial differences in effects according to type of opioid, analgesic potency (strong or weak), daily dose, duration of treatment or follow up, methodological quality of trials, and type of funding. Adverse events were more frequent in patients receiving opioids compared to control. The pooled risk ratio was 1.55 (95% CI 1.41 to 1.70) for any adverse event (4 trials), 4.05 (95% CI 3.06 to 5.38) for dropouts due to adverse events (10 trials), and 3.35 (95% CI 0.83 to 13.56) for serious adverse events (2 trials). Withdrawal symptoms were more severe after fentanyl treatment compared to placebo (SMD 0.60, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.79; 1 trial). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The small to moderate beneficial effects of non-tramadol opioids are outweighed by large increases in the risk of adverse events. Non-tramadol opioids should therefore not be routinely used, even if osteoarthritic pain is severe.

Oral or transdermal opioids for osteoarthritis of the knee or hip.

BACKGROUND Osteoarthritis is the most common form of joint disease and the leading cause of pain and physical disability in older people. Opioids may be a viable treatment option if people have severe pain or if other analgesics are contraindicated. However, the evidence about their effectiveness and safety is contradictory. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2009. OBJECTIVES To determine the effects on pain, function, safety, and addiction of oral or transdermal opioids compared with placebo or no intervention in people with knee or hip osteoarthritis. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL (up to 28 July 2008, with an update performed on 15 August 2012), checked conference proceedings, reference lists, and contacted authors. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared oral or transdermal opioids with placebo or no treatment in people with knee or hip osteoarthritis. We excluded studies of tramadol. We applied no language restrictions. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We extracted data in duplicate. We calculated standardised mean differences (SMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for pain and function, and risk ratios for safety outcomes. We combined trials using an inverse-variance random-effects meta-analysis. MAIN RESULTS We identified 12 additional trials and included 22 trials with 8275 participants in this update. Oral oxycodone was studied in 10 trials, transdermal buprenorphine and oral tapentadol in four, oral codeine in three, oral morphine and oral oxymorphone in two, and transdermal fentanyl and oral hydromorphone in one trial each. All trials were described as double-blind, but the risk of bias for other domains was unclear in several trials due to incomplete reporting. Opioids were more beneficial in pain reduction than control interventions (SMD -0.28, 95% CI -0.35 to -0.20), which corresponds to a difference in pain scores of 0.7 cm on a 10-cm visual analogue scale (VAS) between opioids and placebo. This corresponds to a difference in improvement of 12% (95% CI 9% to 15%) between opioids (41% mean improvement from baseline) and placebo (29% mean improvement from baseline), which translates into a number needed to treat (NNTB) to cause one additional treatment response on pain of 10 (95% CI 8 to 14). Improvement of function was larger in opioid-treated participants compared with control groups (SMD -0.26, 95% CI -0.35 to -0.17), which corresponds to a difference in function scores of 0.6 units between opioids and placebo on a standardised Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) disability scale ranging from 0 to 10. This corresponds to a difference in improvement of 11% (95% CI 7% to 14%) between opioids (32% mean improvement from baseline) and placebo (21% mean improvement from baseline), which translates into an NNTB to cause one additional treatment response on function of 11 (95% CI 7 to 14). We did not find substantial differences in effects according to type of opioid, analgesic potency, route of administration, daily dose, methodological quality of trials, and type of funding. Trials with treatment durations of four weeks or less showed larger pain relief than trials with longer treatment duration (P value for interaction = 0.001) and there was evidence for funnel plot asymmetry (P value = 0.054 for pain and P value = 0.011 for function). Adverse events were more frequent in participants receiving opioids compared with control. The pooled risk ratio was 1.49 (95% CI 1.35 to 1.63) for any adverse event (9 trials; 22% of participants in opioid and 15% of participants in control treatment experienced side effects), 3.76 (95% CI 2.93 to 4.82) for drop-outs due to adverse events (19 trials; 6.4% of participants in opioid and 1.7% of participants in control treatment dropped out due to adverse events), and 3.35 (95% CI 0.83 to 13.56) for serious adverse events (2 trials; 1.3% of participants in opioid and 0.4% of participants in control treatment experienced serious adverse events). Withdrawal symptoms occurred more often in opioid compared with control treatment (odds ratio (OR) 2.76, 95% CI 2.02 to 3.77; 3 trials; 2.4% of participants in opioid and 0.9% of participants control treatment experienced withdrawal symptoms). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The small mean benefit of non-tramadol opioids are contrasted by significant increases in the risk of adverse events. For the pain outcome in particular, observed effects were of questionable clinical relevance since the 95% CI did not include the minimal clinically important difference of 0.37 SMDs, which corresponds to 0.9 cm on a 10-cm VAS.

Effects of opioids on human serotonin transporters.

The serotonin (5-hydroxtryptamine, 5-HT) system plays a role in analgesia and emesis. The aim of this study was to test whether opioids or ketamine inhibit the human 5-HT transporter and whether this increases free plasma 5-HT concentrations. HEK293 cells, stably transfected with the human 5-HT transporter cDNA, were incubated with morphine, hydromorphone, fentanyl, alfentanil, pethidine (meperidine), tramadol, ketamine, and the reference substance citalopram (specific 5-HT transporter inhibitor). The uptake of [(3)H]5-HT was measured by liquid scintillation counting. In a second series of experiments, study drugs were incubated with plasma of ten healthy blood donors and change of 5-HT plasma-concentrations were measured (ELISA). The end point was the inhibition of the 5-HT transporter by different analgesics either in HEK293 cells or in human platelets ex vivo. Tramadol, pethidine, and ketamine suppressed [(3)H]5-HT uptake dose-dependently with an IC50 of 1, 20.9, and 230 μM, respectively. These drugs also prevented 5-HT uptake in platelets with an increase in free plasma 5-HT. Free 5-HT concentrations in human plasma were increased by citalopram 1 μM, tramadol 20 μM, pethidine 30 μM, and ketamine 100 μM to 280 [248/312]%, 269 [188/349]%, and 149 [122/174]%, respectively, compared to controls without any co-incubation (means [95 % CI]; all p < 0.005). No change in both experimental settings was observed for the other opioids. Tramadol and pethidine inhibited the 5-HT transporter in HEK293 cells and platelets. This inhibition may contribute to serotonergic effects when these opioids are given in combination, e.g., with monoamine oxidase inhibitors or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors.

Opioids and NMDA receptors: Neuro-excitation and abnormal pain behaviours

In the clinical setting, chronic administration of high doses of systemic morphine may result in neuro-excitatory behaviours such as myoclonus and allodynia in some patients. Additionally, high doses of m-opioid agonists such as morphine administered chronically by the intrathecal route in both rats and humans, as well as DAMGO in rats, have been reported to produce neuro-excitatory behaviours. However, more recently, it has begun to be appreciated that even at normal analgesic doses, opioids such as morphine are capable not only of activating pain inhibitory systems (analgesia/antinociception), but they also activate pain facilitatory systems such that post-opioid allodynia/hyperalgesia may be evident after cessation of opioid treatment. Whilst it is well documented that opioid receptors mediate the inhibitory effects of opioid analgesics, the excitatory and pro-nociceptive effects of opioids appear to involve indirect activation of N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptors, such that the extent of pain relief produced may be the net effect of these two opposing actions. Apart from the NMDA-nitric oxide (NO) pro-nociceptive signaling cascade, considerable evidence also implicates dynorphin A as well as the endogenous anti-opioid peptides cholecystokinin (CCK), neuropeptide FF (NPFF) and orphanin FQ/nociceptin, in mediating opioid-induced neuro-excitation and abnormal pain behaviours. Apart from the neuro-excitatory effects that may be produced by the parent opioid, systemic administration of some opioid analgesics such as morphine and hydromorphone in rats and humans results in their rapid conversion to 3-glucuronide metabolites that also contribute significantly to the neuro-excitatory and abnormal pain behaviours produced

Should topical opioid analgesics be regarded as effective and safe when applied to chronic cutaneous lesions?

Objectives: The induction of analgesia for many chronic cutaneous lesions requires treatment with an opioid analgesic. In many patients suffering with these wounds such drugs are either contraindicated or shunned because of their association with death. There are now case reports involving over 100 patients with many different types of chronic superficial wounds, which suggest that the topical application of an opioid in a suitable gel leads to a significant reduction in the level of perceived pain. Key findings: Some work has been undertaken to elucidate the mechanisms by which such a reduction is achieved. To date there have been no proven deleterious effects of such an analgesic system upon wound healing. Although morphine is not absorbed through the intact epidermis, an open wound provides no such barrier and for large wounds drug absorption can be problematic. However, for most chronic cutaneous lesions, where data has been gathered, the blood levels of the drug applied ranges from undetectable to below that required for a systemic effect. Summary If proven, the use of opioids in this way would provide adequate analgesia for a collection of wounds, which are difficult to treat in patients who are often vulnerable. Proof of this concept is now urgently required. © 2011 Royal Pharmaceutical Society.