Effects of epidural clonidine and neostigmine following intrathecal labour analgesia: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Antinociceptive Effects and Interaction Mechanisms of Intrathecal Pentazocine and Neostigmine in Two Different Pain Models in Rats

Background

Pentazocine produces a wide variety of actions in the treatment of perioperative analgesia. Neostigmine is a cholinesterase inhibitor used to antagonize the residual effects of muscle relaxants and also produces an analgesic effect.

Objectives

To investigate the analgesic effects of intrathecally injected pentazocine and neostigmine and their interaction.

Methods

Sprague–Dawley rats were used to test the analgesic effect of pentazocine and neostigmine using the paw formalin pain model and the incision mechanical allodynia model. Pentazocine (3, 10, 30, and 100 μg), neostigmine (0.3, 1, 3, and 10 μg) or a pentazocine-neostigmine mixture were separately injected to evaluate their antinociceptive effects alone on the treatment groups. The corresponding control group received an intrathecal injection containing the same volume of saline. The formalin pain test, or the plantar incision pain behavior test were performed 30 minutes later. Isobolographic analysis was used to evaluate the interaction between pentazocine and neostigmine. Intrathecally administered selective mu-opioid receptor antagonist CTAP, selective kappa-opioid receptor antagonist nor-Binaltorphimine (nor-BNI), nonselective opioid receptor antagonist naloxone, and muscarinic acetylcholine receptor antagonist atropine were also used to test the possible interaction mechanism. These antagonists were used 30 minutes before the pentazocine and neostigmine mixtures which were intrathecally injected.

Results

Intrathecally administered pentazocine (3, 10, 30, and 100 μg) and neostigmine (0.3, 1, 3, and 10 μg) alone had a marked dose-related impact on suppressing the biphasic responses in the formalin test. Pentazocine (3, 10, 30, and 100 μg) and neostigmine (0.3, 1, 3, and 10 μg) alone attenuated the mechanical allodynia in a plantar incision model in a dose-dependent manner. Isobolographic analysis revealed that the mixture of intrathecal pentazocine and neostigmine synergistically decreased both phase I and II activity in the formalin test and mechanical allodynia in the plantar incision model. Pretreatment of intrathecally administered nor-BNI, naloxone, atropine, but not CTAP, antagonized the analgesic effect of the pentazocine-neostigmine mixture.

Conclusions

All of these results suggest that the combined application of pentazocine and neostigmine is an effective way to relieve pain from formalin and acute incision mechanical allodynia. The synergistic effect between pentazocine and neostigmine is mostly attributed to the kappa-opioid receptor and the cholinergic receptor in the spinal cord.

Neuraxial labor analgesia: Initiation techniques

The ideal technique for labor analgesia would have a quick onset, predictable quality, and adjustable depth and duration. Moreover, it would be easy to perform and have minimal maternal and fetal side effects. A catheter-based neuraxial approach encompasses these desirable characteristics and includes the epidural, combined spinal epidural, dural puncture epidural, and intrathecal catheter techniques. In this review, we outline the unique technical considerations, analgesic characteristics, and side effect profiles for each technique that can ultimately impact the maternal-fetal dyad. The selection of neuraxial analgesia techniques should consider the patient and team's goals and expectations, the clinical context, and the institutional culture. Labor analgesic techniques that initiate with an intentional dural puncture component have a faster onset, greater bilateral and sacral spread, and lower rates of epidural catheter failure. Further elucidation of the mechanisms, benefits, and risks of each neuraxial initiation technique will continue to benefit patients and care providers.

Epidural Neostigmine versus Fentanyl to Decrease Bupivacaine Use in Patient-controlled Epidural Analgesia during Labor: A Randomized, Double-blind, Controlled Study

BACKGROUND

The addition of opioids to epidural local anesthetic reduces local anesthetic consumption by 20% but at the expense of side effects and time spent for regulatory compliance paperwork. Epidural neostigmine also reduces local anesthetic use. The authors hypothesized that epidural bupivacaine with neostigmine would decrease total hourly bupivacaine use compared with epidural bupivacaine with fentanyl for patient-controlled epidural analgesia.

METHODS

A total of 215 American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status II, laboring parturients requesting labor epidural analgesia consented to the study and were randomized to receive 0.125% bupivacaine with the addition of either fentanyl (2 μg/ml) or neostigmine (2, 4, or 8 μg/ml). The primary outcome was total hourly local anesthetic consumption, defined as total patient-controlled epidural analgesia use and top-ups (expressed as milliliters of 0.125% bupivacaine) divided by the infusion duration. A priori analysis determined a group size of 35 was needed to have 80% power at α = 0.05 to detect a 20% difference in the primary outcome.

RESULTS

Of 215 subjects consented, 151 patients were evaluable. Demographics, maternal and fetal outcomes, and labor characteristics were similar among groups. Total hourly local anesthetic consumption did not differ among groups (P = 0.55). The total median hourly bupivacaine consumption in the fentanyl group was 16.0 ml/h compared with 15.3, 14.6, and 16.2 ml/h in the 2, 4, and 8 μg/ml neostigmine groups, respectively (P = 0.55).

CONCLUSIONS

The data do not support any difference in bupivacaine requirements for labor patient-controlled epidural analgesia whether patients receive epidural bupivacaine with 2 to 8 μg/ml neostigmine or epidural bupivacaine with 2 μg/ml fentanyl.

Effect of epidural clonidine on characteristics of spinal anaesthesia in patients undergoing gynaecological surgeries: A clinical study

Background and Aims:

Combined spinal–epidural (CSE) anaesthesia is being increasingly used for effective post-operative analgesia. This study was designed to evaluate the effect of epidural clonidine on characteristics of spinal anaesthesia for gynaecological surgeries.

Methods:

This was a prospective randomised, double-blind, controlled study involving sixty patients belonging to American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status I and II who underwent gynaecological surgeries were randomly divided into clonidine (C) group and saline (S) group of thirty each. All patients received CSE anaesthesia. Ten minutes before subarachnoid block (SAB), Group C received clonidine 150 μg diluted to 5 ml in normal saline (NS) and Group S received NS epidurally. Hyperbaric bupivacaine (15 mg) was administered intrathecally for both groups after epidural injection. Sensory and motor block characteristics, analgesia, sedation and haemodynamics were observed. Statistical analysis was performed using appropriate tests.

Results:

Epidural clonidine produced faster onset (37.83 ± 8.58 s in Group C compared to 50.33 ± 8.80 s in Group S, P = 0.001) and prolonged duration of sensory block (241.17±18.65 minutes in group C compared to 150.33±19.16 minutes in group S, P = 0.001). Time for two segment regression of sensory block was193.67 ± 19.82 min in Group C and 109.33 ± 18.56 min Group S (P < 0.001). The duration of analgesia was 299.00 ± 43.38 min in Group C and 152.50 ± 21.04 min in Group S (P < 0.001). Haemodynamics and sedation scores were comparable between two groups.

Conclusion:

Administration of clonidine epidurally, 10 min before SAB, caused early onset and prolonged duration of motor blockade and analgesia, without any significant post-operative complication.

A systematic review of the effects of adding neostigmine to local anesthetics for neuraxial administration in obstetric anesthesia and analgesia

BACKGROUND

Drugs used in obstetric patients must accomplish two goals: efficacy and safety for both mother and fetus. Neostigmine has been co-administered epidurally and intrathecally with local anesthetics and other adjuncts in the obstetric setting. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy and incidence of adverse events related to the use of neostigmine in obstetric anesthesia.

METHODS

A meta-analysis of randomized-controlled human trials was conducted using the data sources Google Scholar and PubMed (updated 1 November 2014). Inclusion criteria were: random allocation to treatment; comparison of neostigmine or neostigmine with local anesthetics and/or other adjuvants versus placebo or placebo with local anesthetics and/or other adjuvants; and approval by an ethics committee.

RESULTS

The use of neostigmine as an adjuvant in neuraxial anesthesia is associated with a reduction in the dose of local anesthetic during labor analgesia and postoperative analgesia following cesarean section: mean reduction of local anesthetic (ropivacaine or bupivacaine) vs. control -4.08 (95% CI -6.7 to -1.5) mg/h (P=0.002). The risk of nausea was increased vs. control with intrathecal neostigmine (OR 8.99 [95% CI 4.74 to 17.05], P <0.001) but not with epidural neostigmine (OR 0.97 [95% CI 0.46 to 2.05], P=0.94). Use of neuraxial neostigmine was associated with a decrease in the risk of pruritus but there was no increase in the incidence of hypotension, dizziness or sedation and no effect on the incidence of abnormal fetal heart rate patterns or Apgar scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Neuraxial administration of neostigmine significantly reduces local anesthetic consumption without serious adverse side effects to the mother or fetus. However, neostigmine is only recommended for epidural administration as intrathecal use significantly increases the incidence of maternal nausea and vomiting.

Anaesthetic challenges and management during pregnancy: Strategies revisited

During pregnancy, an obstetrician can encounter various complications and sometimes require surgery or operative intervention for delivery. However, the role of anaesthesiologists during such clinical scenario is grossly under-estimated. Without any close coordination and team work among obstetricians, neonatologists and an anaesthesiologist, morbidity and mortality can increase during these surgical interventions. The clinical scenario can become more challenging if the parturient suffers from any comorbid diseases. The present article reviews some of the common challenging scenarios during pregnancy that an anaesthesiologist frequently encounters during routine practice. Anaesthetic management has been discussed briefly and separately for each trimester and post-partum period. The article also aims at gaining in-depth knowledge of these obstetrical and surgical emergencies so as to ensure close-knit team work among obstetricians, anaesthesiologists, intensivists and a neonatologist.

The evolution of spinal/epidural neostigmine in clinical application: Thoughts after two decades

Since the first clinical application of analgesia following spinal anticholinesterase by 1940's, several clinical double-blind studies have been conducted to date, where intrathecal doses of neostigmine in humans ranged from 750 to 1 μg, due to side-effects. Conversely, epidural neostigmine has been evaluated in proportionally higher doses and represents an alternative, but still deserves more investigation concerning both acute and chronic pain, as it seems devoid of important side-effects.

Muscarinic pain pharmacology: realizing the promise of novel analgesics by overcoming old challenges

The antinociceptive and analgesic effects of muscarinic receptor ligands in human and nonhuman species have been evident for more than half a century. In this review, we describe the current understanding of the roles of different muscarinic subtypes in pain modulation and their mechanism of action along the pain signaling pathway, including peripheral nociception, spinal cord pain processing, and supraspinal analgesia. Extensive preclinical and clinical validation of these mechanisms points to the development of selective muscarinic agonists as one of the most exciting and promising avenues toward novel pain medications.

Labour analgesia: Recent advances

Advances in the field of labour analgesia have tread a long journey from the days of ether and chloroform in 1847 to the present day practice of comprehensive programme of labour pain management using evidence-based medicine. Newer advances include introduction of newer techniques like combined spinal epidurals, low-dose epidurals facilitating ambulation, pharmacological advances like introduction of remifentanil for patient-controlled intravenous analgesia, introduction of newer local anaesthetics and adjuvants like ropivacaine, levobupivacaine, sufentanil, clonidine and neostigmine, use of inhalational agents like sevoflourane for patient-controlled inhalational analgesia using special vaporizers, all have revolutionized the practice of pain management in labouring parturients. Technological advances like use of ultrasound to localize epidural space in difficult cases minimizes failed epidurals and introduction of novel drug delivery modalities like patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) pumps and computer-integrated drug delivery pumps have improved the overall maternal satisfaction rate and have enabled us to customize a suitable analgesic regimen for each parturient. Recent randomized controlled trials and Cochrane studies have concluded that the association of epidurals with increased caesarean section and long-term backache remains only a myth. Studies have also shown that the newer, low-dose regimes do not have a statistically significant impact on the duration of labour and breast feeding and also that these reduce the instrumental delivery rates thus improving maternal and foetal safety. Advances in medical technology like use of ultrasound for localizing epidural space have helped the clinicians to minimize the failure rates, and many novel drug delivery modalities like PCEA and computer-integrated PCEA have contributed to the overall maternal satisfaction and safety.

Effects of a continuous low-dose clonidine epidural regimen on pain, satisfaction and adverse events during labour: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Epidural clonidine has been proposed as an adjunct for anaesthetic mixtures during labour. Administered as a bolus, clonidine may have side effects such as sedation and hypotension; its continuous infusion could be attractive in this respect. We, therefore, conducted a randomized, double-blind trial using patient-controlled epidural analgesia with a background infusion using a low dose of clonidine during labour.

METHODS

A total of 128 healthy parturients in active labour received a patient-controlled epidural analgesia solution of 0.0625% levobupivacaine and sufentanil 0.25 microg ml(-1) with or without clonidine 2 microg ml(-1). Ninety-five parturients were analysed. The pain score over time was evaluated as well as drug volume utilization; supplementation bolus and side effects were recorded. The primary endpoint was maternal satisfaction [ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT00437996)].

RESULTS

Three patients in the control group failed to achieve satisfactory epidural analgesia owing to a technical issue. Although the primary endpoint was not statistically significant, analgesia was more pronounced and obtained earlier in the clonidine group. The area under the curve for the visual analogue pain score was significantly lower in the clonidine group. In this group, hourly doses of levobupivacaine and sufentanil were reduced (13.9 +/- 4.3 vs. 16.3 ml +/- 4.0; P = 0.005) as well as rescue supplementation and pruritus incidence (18 vs. 46%; P = 0.004). Maternal blood pressure was significantly lower, over time, in the clonidine group but remained within the normal range. Sedation was similar in both groups (4.3 vs. 2.0%; not significant).

CONCLUSION

The addition of clonidine to epidural levobupivacaine and sufentanil for patient-controlled epidural analgesia in labour improved analgesia, reduced the supplementation rate and reduced pruritus without improvement in maternal satisfaction. Blood pressure was significantly lower in the clonidine group over time but without clinical consequence.

Optimal duration of urinary catheterization after thoracotomy in patients under postoperative patient-controlled epidural analgesia

BACKGROUND

Epidural analgesia is widely used for efficient pain relief after major surgery. However, it may cause urinary retention, leading to delayed removal of bladder catheters with prolonged patient discomfort. Using a specific regimen in patient controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA), we examined the optimal duration of urinary catheterization in patients undergoing major thoracic surgery.

METHODS

Seventy-eight patients scheduled for elective thoracotomy were prospectively randomized into two groups: Group 1, removal of the transurethral catheter on the first postoperative day (n = 38); Group 2, removal of the catheter after discontinuation of PCEA (n = 40). The PCEA regimen was a mixture containing low-dose morphine, bupivacaine and neostigmine and was given for 3 days after surgery in all subjects. Micturition problems, pain scores assessed by the visual analog scale (VAS), and side effects were evaluated during and after PCEA treatment.

RESULTS

The average duration of urinary drainage after surgery was 30.2 + or - 5.1 hours and 78.5 + or - 7.3 hours in Groups 1 and 2, respectively. After removal of the bladder catheter, no patient in either group required re-catheterization for urinary retention or encountered catheter-related infection. VAS scores were significantly lower in Group 1 at rest and at 24, 36 and 48 hours after cessation of PCEA. VAS scores were significantly higher in Group 2 patients, possibly due to catheter-induced pain related to prolonged catheterization.

CONCLUSION

Routine continuous bladder catheterization may not necessarily be required after thoracotomy in patients with ongoing continuous thoracic epidural analgesia.