Author(s): Murphy PM, Stack D, Kinirons B, Laffey JG
Abstract Share this page
Abstract Intrathecal (IT) morphine provides excellent postoperative analgesia but may result in many side effects, including postoperative nausea and vomiting, pruritus, and respiratory depression, particularly at larger doses. Older patients may be at particular risk. The optimal dose of spinal morphine in older patients undergoing hip arthroplasty is not known. We designed this prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blinded study to evaluate the analgesic efficacy and side effect profile of 50-200 microg of IT morphine in older patients undergoing elective hip arthroplasty. Sixty patients older than 65 years undergoing elective hip arthroplasty were enrolled. Patients were randomized to receive spinal anesthesia with 15 mg of bupivacaine and IT morphine in four groups: 1). 0 microg, 2). 50 microg, 3). 100 microg, and 4). 200 microg. IT morphine 100 and 200 microg produced effective pain relief and decreased the postoperative requirement for morphine compared with control. IT morphine 50 microg did not provide effective pain relief. Both 100 and 200 microg of IT morphine provided comparable levels of postoperative analgesia. There were no between-group differences in postoperative nausea and vomiting, sedation, respiratory depression, or urinary retention. Pruritus was significantly more frequent with 200 microg of IT morphine. In conclusion, 100 microg of IT morphine provided the best balance between analgesic efficacy and side effect profile in older patients undergoing hip arthroplasty. IMPLICATIONS: The dosage of intrathecal morphine that provides the best balance between analgesic efficacy and side effect profile in the older patient undergoing hip arthroplasty is not known. This prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blinded clinical trial demonstrates that a dose of 100 microg of intrathecal morphine provides the best balance between efficacy and side effects, compared with doses of 0, 50, and 200 microg of morphine, in this patient population.
This article was published in Anesth Analg
and referenced in Journal of Anesthesia & Clinical Research