The comparative study of intravenous Ondansetron and sub-hypnotic Propofol dose in control and treatment of intrathecal Sufentanil-induced pruritus in elective caesarean surgery

Anahita Hirmanpour, Mohammadreza Safavi, Azim Honarmand, Akram Zavaran Hosseini, Maryam Sepehrian, Anahita Hirmanpour, Mohammadreza Safavi, Azim Honarmand, Akram Zavaran Hosseini, Maryam Sepehrian

Abstract

Objective: Pruritus is a common and disturbing side effect of neuraxial opioids after cesarean section. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of intravenous ondansetron and sub-hypnotic dose of propofol in control and treatment of intrathecal sufentanil induced pruritus in cesarean surgery.

Methods: Totally, 90 parturient with American Society of Anesthesiology physical status grade I-II, undergoing spinal anesthesia with 2.5 μg sufentanil and 10 mg bupivacaine 0.5% were enrolled to this randomized, prospective, double-blind study. The women were randomly assigned to two groups who received 8 mg ondansetron or 10 mg propofol to treat pruritus grade ≥3. The patient was evaluated after 5 min and in the lack of successful treatment, the doses of two drugs repeated and if the pruritus is on-going, the exact treatment with naloxone was done.

Findings: The incidence of pruritus was 69.3%. Both groups were well-matched. The peak time pruritus was 30-75 min after injection. The percentage of individuals consumed naloxone were 6.8% and 15.9% in ondansetron and propofol groups, respectively (P = 0.18). The mean score of satisfaction (according to visual analog scale criteria) was 9.09 ± 1.1 in ondansetron group and 9.3 ± 1.07 in the propofol group (P = 0.39).

Conclusion: Ondansetrone and sub-hypnotic dose of propofol are both safe and well-tolerated. Due to their same efficacy in the treatment of intrathecal sufentanil-induced pruritus, they can be widely used in clinical practice.

Keywords: Caesarean surgery; Ondansetron; Propofol; intrathecal opioid; pruritus.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
CONSORT diagram of the study
Figure 2
Figure 2
Mean systole blood pressure (mmHg) from pre-surgery to the end of recovery (P = 0.07)
Figure 3
Figure 3
Mean diastole blood pressure (mmHg) from pre-surgery to the end of recovery (P = 0.52)
Figure 4
Figure 4
Mean arterial pressure (mmHg) from pre-surgery to the end of recovery (P = 0.26)
Figure 5
Figure 5
Mean heart rate (beats/min) from pre-surgery to the end of recovery (P = 0.99)
Figure 6
Figure 6
Mean SpO2 (%) from pre-surgery to the end of recovery (P = 0.20)
Figure 7
Figure 7
Mean pruritus intensity from pre-surgery to the end of recovery (P = 0.44)

References

    1. Birnbach DJ, Ingrid M. Anesthesia for obstetrics. In: Miller RD, editor. Text Book of Anesthesia. Philadelphia: Chuchil Livingstone; 2010. pp. 2215–9.
    1. Norris MC. Height, weight, and the spread of subarachnoid hyperbaric bupivacaine in the term parturient. Anesth Analg. 1988;67:555–8.
    1. Santos AC, Buklin BA. Local anesthetics and opioids. In: David H, editor. Chestnut Obstetric Anesthesia. Philadelphia PA 19103-2899: Mosby, Elsevier; 2014. p. 284.
    1. Cohen SE, Cherry CM, Holbrook RH, Jr, el-Sayed YY, Gibson RN, Jaffe RA. Intrathecal sufentanil for labor analgesia – sensory changes, side effects, and fetal heart rate changes. Anesth Analg. 1993;77:1155–60.
    1. Gowan JD, Hurtig JB, Fraser RA, Torbicki E, Kitts J. Naloxone infusion after prophylactic epidural morphine: Effects on incidence of postoperative side-effects and quality of analgesia. Can J Anaesth. 1988;35:143–8.
    1. Borgeat A, Wilder-Smith OH, Suter PM. The nonhypnotic therapeutic applications of propofol. Anesthesiology. 1994;80:642–56.
    1. Liu S, Chiu AA, Carpenter RL, Mulroy MF, Allen HW, Neal JM, et al. Fentanyl prolongs lidocaine spinal anesthesia without prolonging recovery. Anesth Analg. 1995;80:730–4.
    1. Liu SS. Optimizing spinal anesthesia for ambulatory surgery. Reg Anesth. 1997;22:500–10.
    1. Ben-David B, Solomon E, Levin H, Admoni H, Goldik Z. Intrathecal fentanyl with small-dose dilute bupivacaine: Better anesthesia without prolonging recovery. Anesth Analg. 1997;85:560–5.
    1. Szarvas S, Harmon D, Murphy D. Neuraxial opioid-induced pruritus: A review. J Clin Anesth. 2003;15:234–9.
    1. Bromage PR, Camporesi EM, Durant PA, Nielsen CH. Nonrespiratory side effects of epidural morphine. Anesth Analg. 1982;61:490–5.
    1. Hu JW, Dostrovsky JO, Sessle BJ. Functional properties of neurons in cat trigeminal subnucleus caudalis (medullary dorsal horn). I. Responses to oral-facial noxious and nonnoxious stimuli and projections to thalamus and subnucleus oralis. J Neurophysiol. 1981;45:173–92.
    1. Borgeat A, Wilder-Smith OH, Saiah M, Rifat K. Subhypnotic doses of propofol relieve pruritus induced by epidural and intrathecal morphine. Anesthesiology. 1992;76:510–2.
    1. Ikoma A, Rukwied R, Ständer S, Steinhoff M, Miyachi Y, Schmelz M. Neurophysiology of pruritus: Interaction of itch and pain. Arch Dermatol. 2003;139:1475–8.
    1. George RB, Allen TK, Habib AS. Serotonin receptor antagonists for the prevention and treatment of pruritus, nausea, and vomiting in women undergoing cesarean delivery with intrathecal morphine: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Anesth Analg. 2009;109:174–82.
    1. Dahlgren G, Hultstrand C, Jakobsson J, Norman M, Eriksson EW, Martin H. Intrathecal sufentanil, fentanyl, or placebo added to bupivacaine for cesarean section. Anesth Analg. 1997;85:1288–93.
    1. Ganesh A, Maxwell LG. Pathophysiology and management of opioid-induced pruritus. Drugs. 2007;67:2323–33.
    1. Rawal N, Sjöstrand U, Dahlström B. Postoperative pain relief by epidural morphine. Anesth Analg. 1981;60:726–31.
    1. Kumar K, Singh SI. Neuraxial opioid-induced pruritus: An update. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2013;29:303–7.
    1. Beilin Y, Bernstein HH, Zucker-Pinchoff B, Zahn J, Zenzen WJ. Subhypnotic doses of propofol do not relieve pruritus induced by intrathecal morphine after cesarean section. Anesth Analg. 1998;86:310–3.

Source: PubMed

3
Sottoscrivi