Department of Anesthesiology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany; Department of Anesthesiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; Department of Anesthesiology, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri.
Department of Anesthesiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Anesthesiology. 2023 Jul 1;139(1):16-34. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000004567.
Balancing between opioid analgesia and respiratory depression continues to challenge clinicians in perioperative, emergency department, and other acute care settings. Morphine and hydromorphone are postoperative analgesic standards. Nevertheless, their comparative effects and side effects, timing, and respective variabilities remain poorly understood. This study tested the hypothesis that IV morphine and hydromorphone differ in onset, magnitude, duration, and variability of analgesic and ventilatory effects.
The authors conducted a randomized crossover study in healthy volunteers. Forty-two subjects received a 2-h IV infusion of hydromorphone (0.05 mg/kg) or morphine (0.2 mg/kg) 1 to 2 weeks apart. The authors measured arterial opioid concentrations, analgesia in response to heat pain (maximally tolerated temperature, and verbal analog pain scores at discrete preset temperatures to determine half-maximum temperature effect), dark-adapted pupil diameter and miosis, end-expired carbon dioxide, and respiratory rate for 12 h after dosing.
For morphine and hydromorphone, respectively, maximum miosis was less (3.9 [3.4 to 4.2] vs. 4.6 mm [4.0 to 5.0], P < 0.001; median and 25 to 75% quantiles) and occurred later (3.1 ± 0.9 vs. 2.3 ± 0.7 h after infusion start, P < 0.001; mean ± SD); maximum tolerated temperature was less (49 ± 2 vs. 50 ± 2°C, P < 0.001); verbal pain scores at end-infusion at the most informative stimulus (48.2°C) were 82 ± 4 and 59 ± 3 (P < 0.001); maximum end-expired CO2 was 47 (45 to 50) and 48 mmHg (46 to 51; P = 0.007) and occurred later (5.5 ± 2.8 vs. 3.0 ± 1.5 h after infusion start, P < 0.001); and respiratory nadir was 9 ± 1 and 11 ± 2 breaths/min (P < 0.001), and occurred at similar times. The area under the temperature tolerance-time curve was less for morphine (1.8 [0.0 to 4.4]) than hydromorphone (5.4°C-h [1.6 to 12.1] P < 0.001). Interindividual variability in clinical effects did not differ between opioids.
For morphine compared to hydromorphone, analgesia and analgesia relative to respiratory depression were less, onset of miosis and respiratory depression was later, and duration of respiratory depression was longer. For each opioid, timing of the various clinical effects was not coincident. Results may enable more rational opioid selection, and suggest hydromorphone may have a better clinical profile.
在围手术期、急诊室和其他急性护理环境中,平衡阿片类镇痛药的镇痛效果和呼吸抑制作用仍然是临床医生面临的挑战。吗啡和氢吗啡酮是术后镇痛的标准药物。然而,它们的作用效果和副作用、起效时间、持续时间以及各自的可变性仍未得到很好的理解。本研究旨在验证以下假设,即静脉注射吗啡和氢吗啡酮在起效、强度、持续时间和镇痛及呼吸抑制作用的可变性方面存在差异。
本研究采用健康志愿者随机交叉试验设计。42 名志愿者在 1 至 2 周内分别接受氢吗啡酮(0.05mg/kg)或吗啡(0.2mg/kg)2 小时静脉输注。作者测量了动脉阿片类药物浓度、热痛(最大耐受温度和离散预设温度下的口述模拟疼痛评分以确定半最大温度效应)、暗适应瞳孔直径和瞳孔缩小、呼气末二氧化碳分压和呼吸频率,以评估给药后 12 小时内的镇痛效果。
与吗啡相比,氢吗啡酮引起的最大瞳孔缩小程度更小(3.9 [3.4 至 4.2] vs. 4.6 mm [4.0 至 5.0],P < 0.001;中位数和 25%至 75%分位数)且出现时间更晚(3.1±0.9 对比 2.3±0.7 小时,P < 0.001;平均值±标准差);最大耐受温度更低(49±2 对比 50±2°C,P < 0.001);输注结束时最敏感刺激(48.2°C)的口述疼痛评分分别为 82±4 和 59±3(P < 0.001);最大呼气末二氧化碳分压分别为 47(45 至 50)和 48 mmHg(46 至 51;P = 0.007)且出现时间更晚(5.5±2.8 对比 3.0±1.5 小时,P < 0.001);呼吸频率最低值分别为 9±1 和 11±2 次/分钟(P < 0.001),且出现时间相似。与氢吗啡酮相比,吗啡的温度耐受时间曲线下面积更小(1.8 [0.0 至 4.4] 对比 5.4°C-h [1.6 至 12.1],P < 0.001)。两种阿片类药物的临床效果的个体间可变性无差异。
与氢吗啡酮相比,吗啡的镇痛效果和镇痛相对于呼吸抑制作用较弱,瞳孔缩小和呼吸抑制的出现时间较晚,呼吸抑制的持续时间较长。对于每种阿片类药物,各种临床效果的出现时间并不一致。结果可能有助于更合理地选择阿片类药物,并提示氢吗啡酮可能具有更好的临床特征。