Literature DB >> 27306255

Intrathecal Versus Intravenous Morphine in Minimally Invasive Posterior Lumbar Fusion: A Blinded Randomized Comparative Prospective Study.

Fabio Silvio Mario Araimo Morselli1, Francesco Zuccarini, Federico Caporlingua, Ilaria Scarpa, Carmela Imperiale, Alessandro Caporlingua, Lorenzo De Biase, Paolo Tordiglione.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: A blinded, randomized, comparative prospective study.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the use of intrathecal morphine to endovenous morphine on postoperative pain after posterior lumbar surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Intrathecal morphine can provide significant safe analgesia for at least 12 hours and up to 24 hours in patients undergoing major surgery. Its dosages have been decreasing in the last 30 years, but currently, the optimal dose remains unknown. As of today, there are no studies comparing the efficacy and the side effects of this technique with intravenous morphine administration after minimally invasive lumbar fusion surgery.
METHODS: We randomized and compared two groups of 25 patients, who were given either 100 μg intrathecal (ITM group) or 5 ± 2 mg intravenous morphine delivered intravenously for 24 hours at 2 mL/h (IVM group) after minimally invasive posterior lumbar fusion. VAS score at 0, 6, 12, 24 hours, mobilization out of bed at 6 hours, hospitalization duration and complications as lower limbs paresthesia, urinary retention at 6 and 12 hours, nausea, vomit, itch, and constipation were evaluated.
RESULTS: Data showed a lower VAS score, a reduction of constipation, lower limbs paresthesia, or urinary retention at 12 hours in ITM rather than in the IVM group. None suffered of vomit, itch, or nausea in both groups. Urinary retention was observed more frequently in ITM group at 6 hours. Patients of ITM group were mobilized out bed earlier than those from IVM group.
CONCLUSION: A low dosage of intrathecal morphine is safe and effective after minimally invasive lumbar fusion surgery. The reduction of pain in the study group permitted a shorter hospitalization and earlier mobilization out of bed, augmenting patients' comfort. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 27306255     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001733

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  2 in total

Review 1.  An Update on Postoperative Opioid Use and Alternative Pain Control Following Spine Surgery.

Authors:  Kevin Berardino; Austin H Carroll; Alicia Kaneb; Matthew D Civilette; William F Sherman; Alan D Kaye
Journal:  Orthop Rev (Pavia)       Date:  2021-06-22

Review 2.  REGIONAL ANESTHESIA FOR NEUROSURGERY.

Authors:  Dinko Tonković; Daniela Bandić Pavlović; Robert Baronica; Igor Virag; Martina Miklić Bublić; Nataša Kovač; Drvar Željko
Journal:  Acta Clin Croat       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 0.780

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.