Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T13:56:14.377Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Improvement in postoperative pain relief by the addition of midazolam to an intrathecal injection of buprenorphine and bupivacaine

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 July 2005

F. R. Shah ,
A. R. Halbe ,
I. D. Panchal  and
C. S. Goodchild
F. R. Shah
Affiliation:
B.Y.L. Nair Ch. Hospital and T.N. Medical College, Department of Anaesthesiology, Mumbai, India
A. R. Halbe
Affiliation:
B.Y.L. Nair Ch. Hospital and T.N. Medical College, Department of Anaesthesiology, Mumbai, India
I. D. Panchal
Affiliation:
B.Y.L. Nair Ch. Hospital and T.N. Medical College, Department of Anaesthesiology, Mumbai, India
C. S. Goodchild
Affiliation:
Monash University, Department of Anaesthesia, Melbourne, Australia
Get access

Abstract

Summary

Background and objective: Intrathecal injections of the benzodiazepine midazolam have been reported to cause antinociception in animals and pain relief in human beings, including the potentiation of opioid analgesia. This study compared the efficacy of the addition of midazolam to a mixture of buprenorphine and bupivacaine used for spinal anaesthesia.

Methods: The study was prospective, randomized, and observer blinded. It involved 60 patients (30 per group), ASA I and II, age 20–40 yr, undergoing minor and intermediate lower abdominal surgery under spinal anaesthesia. Patients were randomized into two groups: the control group received a spinal injection of hyperbaric bupivacaine (15 mg) plus buprenorphine (0.15 mg) and the experimental group received a spinal injection of the same two drugs and doses but supplemented with intrathecal midazolam (2 mg).

Results: The duration of postoperative analgesia in the control group was 9.24 ± 2.57 h (mean ± SEM), and 21.33 ± 12.69 h in the midazolam treated group (P < 0.001). Patients treated with intrathecal midazolam had better pain relief judged by visual analogue score on coughing (P = 0.0013) and a nursing mobility score (P < 0.0001). Adverse effects were minor and their incidence was similar in both groups.

Conclusions: We conclude that intrathecal midazolam 2 mg improves the quality and duration of postoperative pain relief afforded by intrathecal buprenorphine and bupivacaine.

Keywords

ADJUVANTS, ANAESTHESIA, midazolam, buprenorphineANAESTHESIA, SPINALPOSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS, pain, postoperative
Type
Original Article
Information
European Journal of Anaesthesiology , Volume 20 , Issue 11 , November 2003 , pp. 904 - 910
Copyright
2003 European Society of Anaesthesiology

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Cousins MJ, Mather LE. Intrathecal and epidural administration of opioids. Anesthesiology 1984; 61: 276–310.Google Scholar
Glynn CJ, Mather LE, Cousins MJ, Wilson PR, Graham JR. Spinal narcotics and respiratory depression. Lancet 1979; 2: 356–357.Google Scholar
Yanez A, Sabbe MB, Stevens CW, Yaksh TL. Interaction of midazolam and morphine in the spinal cord of the rat. Neuropharmacology 1990; 29: 359–364.Google Scholar
Goodchild CS, Guo Z, Musgreave A, Gent JP. Antinociception by intrathecal midazolam involves endogenous neurotransmitters acting at spinal cord delta opioid receptors. Br J Anaesth 1996; 77: 758–763.Google Scholar
Edwards M, Serrao JM, Gent JP, Goodchild CS. On the mechanism by which midazolam causes spinally mediated analgesia. Anesthesiology 1990; 73: 273–277.Google Scholar
Nadeson R, Guo Z, Porter V, Gent JP, Goodchild CS. GABAA receptors and spinally-mediated antinociception in rats. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1996; 278: 620–626.Google Scholar
Lipp M, Daublander M, Lanz E. 0.15 mg Intrathecal buprenorphine applied for postoperative analgesia. A clinical double-blind study. Anaesthesist 1987; 36: 233–238.Google Scholar
Nishimi Y, Yonemura E, Miwa Y, Fukushima K. Effect of intrathecal administration of opioid on minimum alveolar concentration and postoperative pain relief – a comparison of morphine and buprenorphine. Masui 1994; 43: 980–987.Google Scholar
Sen M. Intrathecal buprenorphine for postoperative analgesia in orthopaedic surgery. J Indian Med Assoc 1992; 90: 5–6.Google Scholar
Cripps TP, Goodchild CS. Intrathecal midazolam and the stress response to upper abdominal surgery: adrenocortical, glycaemic, and analgesic effects. Clin J Pain 1988; 4: 125–128.Google Scholar
Goodchild CS, Noble J. The effects of intrathecal midazolam on sympathetic nervous system reflexes in man – a pilot study. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1987; 23: 273–285.Google Scholar
Borg PA, Krijnen HJ. Long-term intrathecal administration of midazolam and clonidine. Clin J Pain 1996; 12: 63–68.Google Scholar
Nishiyama T, Sugai N, Hanaoka K. In vitro changes in the transparency and pH of the CSF caused by adding midazolam. Eur J Anaesthesiol 1998; 15: 27–31.Google Scholar
Kehlet H. Balanced analgesia: a prerequisite for optimal recovery. Br J Surg 1998; 85: 3–4.Google Scholar
Kehlet H. Synergism between analgesics. Ann Med 1995; 27: 259–262.Google Scholar
Owen MD, Özsaraç Ö, Sahin S, Uçkunkaya N, Kaplan N, Magunaci I. Low-dose clonidine and neostigmine prolong the duration of intrathecal bupivacaine-fentanyl for labor analgesia. Anesthesiology 2000; 92: 361–366.Google Scholar
Wei ZY, Roerig SC. Spinal morphine/clonidine antinociceptive synergism is regulated by protein kinase C, but not protein kinase A activity. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1998; 287: 937–943.Google Scholar
Goodchild CS, Serrao JM. Intrathecal midazolam in the rat: evidence for spinally-mediated analgesia. Br J Anaesth 1987; 59: 1563–1570.Google Scholar
Schoeffler P, Auroy P, Bazin JE, Taxi J, Woda A. Subarachnoid midazolam: histologic study in rats and report of its effect on chronic pain in humans. Reg Anesth 1991; 16: 329–332.Google Scholar
Yanez A, Peleteiro R, Camba MA. Intrathecal administration of morphine, midazolam, and their combinationin 4 patients with chronic pain. Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim 1992; 39: 40–42.Google Scholar
Serrao JM, Marks RL, Morley SJ, Goodchild CS. Intrathecal midazolam for the treatment of chronic mechanical low back pain: A controlled comparison with epidural steroid in a pilot study. Pain 1992; 48: 5–12.Google Scholar
Kim MH, Lee YM. Intrathecal midazolam increases the analgesic effects of spinal blockade with bupivacaine in patients undergoing haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Anaesth 2001; 86: 77–79.Google Scholar
Valentine JMJ, Lyons G, Bellamy MC. The effect of intrathecal midazolam on post operative pain. Eur J Anaesthesiol 1996; 13: 589–593.Google Scholar
Goresky GV. The clinical utility of epidural midazolam for inguinal hernia repair in children. Can J Anesth 1995; 42: 755–757.Google Scholar
Naguib M, El Gammal M, Elhattab YS, Seraj M. Midazolam for caudal analgesia in children: comparison with caudal bupivacaine. Can J Anesth 1995; 42: 758–764.Google Scholar
Bozkurt P, Tunali Y, Kaya G, Okar I. Histological changes following epidural injection of midazolam in the neonatal rabbit. Paed Anaesth 1997; 7: 385–389.Google Scholar
Erdine S, Yucel A, Ozyalcin S, et al. Neurotoxicity of midazolam in the rabbit. Pain 1999; 80: 419–423.Google Scholar
Malinovsky J-M, Cozian A, Lepage J-Y, Mussini J-M, Pinaud M, Souron R. Ketamine and midazolam neurotoxicity in the rabbit. Anesthesiology 1991; 75: 91–97.Google Scholar
Svensson BA, Welin M, Gordh JrT, Westman J. Chronic subarachnoid midazolam (Dormicum) in the rat. Morphologic evidence of spinal cord neurotoxicity. Reg Anesth 1995; 20: 426–434.Google Scholar
Auroy P, Schoeffler P, Maillot C, Haberer JP, Woda A. Tolerance intrathecale du midazolam: etude histologique. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim 1988; 7: 81–82.Google Scholar
Bahar M, Cohen ML, Grinshpon Y, Chanimov M. Spinal anaesthesia with midazolam in the rat. Can J Anesth 1997; 44: 208–215.Google Scholar
Nishiyama T, Matsukawa T, Hanaoka K. Acute phase histopathological study of spinally administered midazolam in cats. Anesth Analg 1999; 89: 717–720.Google Scholar
Schwieger IM, Jorge-Costa M, Pizzolato GP, Forster A, Morel DR. Intrathecal midazolam reduces isoflurane MAC and increases the apnoeic threshold in rats. Can J Anesth 1994; 41: 144–148.Google Scholar
Serrao JM, Mackenzie JM, Goodchild CS, Gent JP. Intrathecal midazolam in the rat: an investigation of possible neurotoxic effects. Eur J Anaesthesiol 1990; 7: 115–122.Google Scholar
Coombs DW, Fratkin JD. Neurotoxicology of spinal agents. Anesthesiology 1987; 66: 724–726.Google Scholar
Chapman V, Dickenson AH. The combination of NMDA antagonism and morphine produces profound antinociception in the rat dorsal horn. Brain Res 1992; 573: 321–323.Google Scholar
Suzuki R, Chapman V, Dickenson AH. The effectiveness of spinal and systemic morphine on rat dorsal horn neuronal responses in the spinal nerve ligation model of neuropathic pain. Pain 1999; 80: 215–228.Google Scholar
Haefely W, Polc P. Electrophysiological studies on the interaction of anxiolytic drugs with gabaergic mechanisms. In: Malick JB, Enna SJ, Yamamura HI, eds. Anxiolytics: Neurochemical, Behavioral, and Clinical Perspectives.New York, USA: Raven Press, 1983: 113–145.
Polc P, Bonetti EP, Schaffner R, Haefely W. The effect of diazepam on spinal cord activities: possible sites and mechanisms of action. Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol 1974; 284: 319–337.Google Scholar
Polc P, Ducic I. Afferent stimulation frequency modulates GABAergic phenomena in the spinalcord: reversal by benzodiazepine antagonists. Brain Res 1990; 531: 286–289.Google Scholar
Boulter N, Serrao JM, Gent JP, Goodchild CS. Spinally mediated antinociception following intrathecal chlordiazepoxide – further evidence for a benzodiazepine spinal analgesic effect. Eur J Anaesthesiol 1991; 8: 407–411.Google Scholar
Cox RF, Collins MA. The effects of benzodiazepines on human opioid receptor binding and function. Anesth Analg 2001; 93: 354–358.Google Scholar