The use of high-dose intrathecal diamorphine in laparoscopic bariatric surgery: a single-centre retrospective cohort study.

Intrathecal bariatric bariatric surgery diamorphine neuroaxial

Journal

British journal of pain
ISSN: 2049-4637
Titre abrégé: Br J Pain
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101583844

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
May 2019
Historique:
entrez: 26 4 2019
pubmed: 26 4 2019
medline: 26 4 2019
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The use of intrathecal diamorphine is not commonplace in laparoscopic bariatric surgery. At our institution, a major UK bariatric centre, high-dose intrathecal diamorphine is routinely utilised. Data were analysed retrospectively. Fifty-three patients who had a spinal anaesthetic were matched against age, sex, body mass index and surgical procedure type to generate controls. Pain scores were recorded in the post-anaesthetic care unit on arrival, after 1 hour and on discharge to the ward. Post-operative nausea and vomiting; post-operative hypertension; pruritus; 24-hour morphine consumption and length of stay were measured. Pain scores were better in the spinal anaesthetic group in all measured categories (p = 0.033, p < 0.01, p < 0.01); post-operative nausea and vomiting was less common in the spinal anaesthetic group (p < 0.01); post-operative hypertension was less common in the spinal anaesthetic group (p = 0.25); pruritus was more common in the spinal anaesthetic group (p < 0.01); morphine consumption was less common in the spinal anaesthetic group (p = 0.037). Length of hospital stay was reduced by 12.4 hours (p = 0.025). We propose that this is a practical and safe technique to adopt. A randomised-control trial will need to be conducted in order to find the most efficacious volume of local anaesthetic and dose of diamorphine.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31019692
doi: 10.1177/2049463718800521
pii: 10.1177_2049463718800521
pmc: PMC6463352
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

106-111

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Conflict of interest: The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Références

Anaesthesia. 2001 Jan;56(1):54-60
pubmed: 11167437
Can J Anaesth. 2003 Apr;50(4):336-41
pubmed: 12670809
Br J Anaesth. 2003 Sep;91(3):368-72
pubmed: 12925476
Can J Anaesth. 2005 Feb;52(2):176-80
pubmed: 15684259
Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2004 Feb;17(1):21-30
pubmed: 17021525
Dis Colon Rectum. 2009 Jul;52(7):1239-43
pubmed: 19571699
Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol. 2011 Mar;25(1):73-81
pubmed: 21516915
Br J Surg. 2011 Aug;98(8):1068-78
pubmed: 21590762
Obes Surg. 2013 Aug;23(8):1309-14
pubmed: 23591549
Br J Anaesth. 2014 May;112(5):906-11
pubmed: 24554545
Anaesthesia. 2016 Jan;71(1):85-93
pubmed: 26582586
Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1989 Sep;71(5):289-92
pubmed: 2679331
Br J Pain. 2016 Nov;10(4):209-216
pubmed: 27867510
Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2017 May/Jun;42(3):372-376
pubmed: 28272292
Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim. 2017 Oct;64(8):427-430
pubmed: 28431750

Auteurs

Thomas G Wojcikiewicz (TG)

Department of Anaesthesia, St Mary's Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.

John Jeans (J)

Department of Anaesthesia, St Mary's Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.

Anil Karmali (A)

Department of Anaesthesia, St Mary's Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.

Jackline Nkhoma (J)

Department of Anaesthesia, St Mary's Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.

Jonathan Cousins (J)

Department of Anaesthesia, St Mary's Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.

Michael Kynoch (M)

Department of Anaesthesia, St Mary's Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.

Classifications MeSH