Prevention versus treatment of intrathecal morphine-induced pruritus with ondansetron

Mechanisms and treatment of opioid-induced pruritus: Peripheral and central pathways

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Pruritus (also known as itch) is defined as an unpleasant and irritating sensation of the skin that provokes an urge to scratch or rub. It is well known that opioid administration can cause pruritus, which is paradoxical as itch and pain share overlapping sensory pathways. Because opioids inhibit pain but can cause itching. Significant progress has been made to improve our understanding of the fundamental neurobiology of itch; however, much remains unknown about the mechanisms of opioid-induced pruritus. The prevention and treatment of opioid-induced pruritus remains a challenge in the field of pain management. The objective of this narrative review is to present and discuss the current body of literature and summarize the current understanding of the mechanisms underlying opioid-induced pruritus, and its relationship to analgesia, and possible treatment options.

RESULTS

The incidence of opioid-induced pruritus differs with different opioids and routes of administration, and the various mechanisms can be broadly divided into peripheral and central. Especially central mechanisms are intricate, even at the level of the spinal dorsal horn. There is evidence that opioid receptor antagonists and mixed agonist and antagonists, especially μ-opioid antagonists and κ-opioid agonists, are effective in relieving opioid-induced pruritus. Various treatments have been used for opioid-induced pruritus; however, most of them are controversial and have conflicting results.

CONCLUSION

The use of a multimodal analgesic treatment regimen combined with a mixed antagonist and κ agonists, especially μ-opioid antagonists, and κ-opioid agonists, seems to be the current best treatment modality for the management of opioid-induced pruritus and pain.

SIGNIFICANCE

Opioids remain the gold standard for the treatment of moderate to severe acute pain as well as cancer pain. It is well known that opioid-induced pruritus often does not respond to regular antipruritic treatment, thereby posing a challenge to clinicians in the field of pain management. We believe that our review makes a significant contribution to the literature, as studies on the mechanisms of opioid-induced pruritus and effective management strategies are crucial for the management of these patients.

Ondansetron for the Prevention of Pruritus in Women Undergoing Cesarean Delivery With Intrathecal Opioid: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Pruritus is a frequently reported and unpleasant side effect following intrathecal opioid use with frequency further increased among parturients. We have performed a systematic review to assess the overall efficacy of ondansetron for the prevention of pruritus in patients receiving intrathecal opioid as part of spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery.

METHODS

A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases was conducted from date of inception to September 2022. Studies that included patients undergoing cesarean delivery with spinal anesthesia using intrathecal opioid were included. The primary outcome was the presence of pruritus, and the secondary outcome was time to onset of pruritus. Data from included studies were pooled for analysis using an appropriately determined random-effects model. Outcomes were presented using forest plots and 95% confidence intervals. Additional sensitivity and subgroup analysis were performed. Trial sequential analysis was conducted for the primary outcome.

RESULTS

Twenty-three randomized controlled trials with a total of 2586 patients were included: 1219 received ondansetron, 1030 received a placebo, and a further 337 received a different study drug and were excluded from analysis. Opioids used in the included studies were morphine, fentanyl, and sufentanil. Patients who received ondansetron showed a significant reduction in the incidence of pruritus compared to the control group (RR, 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-0.92; I 2 = 64%). There was no significant difference in pruritus onset between the groups (mean difference [MD], 17.54 minutes; 95% CI, -2.18 to 37.26; I 2 = 83%). The overall Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) assessment of quality of evidence was low.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review has demonstrated a significant reduction in the incidence of pruritus following the use of ondansetron. This is in contrast to previously published meta-analyses. Studies included were of varying quality and some at high risk of bias with a high degree of statistical heterogeneity. Furthermore, high-quality and well-powered studies are required to confirm these findings.

Pharmacological agents for prevention of pruritus in women undergoing Caesarean delivery with neuraxial morphine: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Neuraxial opioids provide effective analgesia for Caesarean delivery, however, pruritus can be a troubling side-effect. Effective agents to prevent pruritus are needed. Our objective was to perform an updated systematic review and network meta-analysis to provide clinicians with a comparison of relative efficacy of available interventions to reduce the incidence of pruritus, induced by either intrathecal or epidural single-shot morphine, in women undergoing Caesarean delivery.

METHODS

Databases systematically searched (up to January 2022) included PubMed MEDLINE, Web of Science, EBSCO CINAHL, Embase, LILACS, and two Cochrane databases. We included randomised, controlled trials involving adult female patients undergoing Caesarean delivery. We pooled trials comparing interventions used for preventing pruritus after Caesarean delivery and performed a Bayesian model network meta-analysis.

RESULTS

The final primary network included data from comparisons of 14 distinct interventions (including placebo) used to reduce the incidence of pruritus in 6185 participants. We judged five interventions to be 'definitely superior' to placebo: propofol, opioid agonist-antagonists (neuraxial), opioid antagonists, opioid agonist-antagonists (systemic), and serotonin antagonists. For the network evaluating the incidence of severe pruritus (warranting additional therapeutic treatment of pruritus), data were available for 14 interventions (including placebo) in 4489 patients. For this outcome, we judged three interventions to be 'definitely superior' to placebo: dopamine antagonists (neuraxial) and systemic and neuraxial opioid agonist-antagonists.

CONCLUSION

Our analysis found several interventions to be effective in reducing the incidence of pruritus. Although sub-hypnotic doses of propofol appear to have an antipruritic effect, replication of this finding and further investigation of optimal dosing are warranted.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL

PROSPERO (CRD42022367058).

Intravenous ondansetron reduced nausea but not pruritus following intrathecal morphine in children: Interim results of a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-control trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

This study's purpose was to determine if ondansetron can prevent pruritus after administration of intrathecal morphine in children, as has been demonstrated in adults.

DESIGN

A double-blinded, randomized placebo-controlled trial.

SETTING

Operating room and first 24 h postoperative inpatient stay at an academic children's hospital.

PATIENTS

Forty-six children aged 3-17 years, who received 4-5 mcg/kg intrathecal morphine for urological or orthopedic procedures were included.

INTERVENTIONS

Children were randomized to receive intravenous ondansetron (treatment) or saline placebo (placebo), prior to intrathecal morphine administration, and q6H for 24 h thereafter. Intraoperative anti-emetics and postoperative rescue treatments for pruritus and nausea were standardized.

MEASUREMENTS

Patients were interviewed q6H for scored pruritus, nausea, and pain, using standardized scales.

MAIN RESULTS

The trial was terminated for futility after interim analysis. Forty-six children were recruited and 45 completed data collection. No significant difference was found between both groups for incidence of pruritus (requiring treatment) [relative risk (RR) 0.9, 95% CI: 0.7, 1.2], during the first postoperative 24 h. Notably, the incidence of pruritus was 84% overall, much higher than rates in previously published studies. Intravenous ondansetron significantly reduced the incidence of nausea, compared with the placebo group [RR 0.5, 95% CI: 0.3, 0.9].

CONCLUSIONS

This study found no evidence for intravenous ondansetron as an effective preventative for pruritus following intrathecal morphine in children. However, this RCT did find that the rate of pruritus following intrathecal morphine administration may be significantly higher than previously thought. Nausea and vomiting (a secondary outcome) were reduced significantly in the treatment group. The negative findings of this study reinforce the potential dangers of extrapolating the drug effects seen in adults onto pediatric patients.

Prevention and Treatment of Neuraxial Morphine-Induced Pruritus: A Scoping Review

The addition of morphine to neuraxial anaesthesia leads to improved postoperative analgesia and lower opioid consumption, but is often accompanied by pruritus. Studies on preventing or treating pruritus show contradictory results. Our objective was to identify effective drugs for the prevention or treatment of pruritus by a scoping review of clinical trials. A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase and Web of Science. We identified clinical trials investigating the prevention or treatment of neuraxial morphine-induced pruritus in adults. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses were screened for eligible studies. One-hundred-and-four articles were included covering 13 pharmacological groups. We conclude that dopamine antagonists, µ-opioid agonist/antagonists and neuraxial or orally administered µ-opioid antagonists prevent pruritus caused by neuraxial morphine regardless of the timing of administration. In the reviewed literature, 5HT3-antagonists prevent neuraxial morphine-induced pruritus when administered before morphine administration. For the treatment of neuraxial morphine-induced pruritus, only nalbuphine appears to be consistently effective. More research is needed to find the most effective doses and the optimal timing of the effective medication.

Medications for the prevention of pruritus in women undergoing cesarean delivery with Intrathecal morphine: A systematic review and bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

Intrathecal morphine-induced pruritus can cause significant discomfort in parturients and is refractory to conventional antipruritic treatment. This systematic review and network meta-analysis evaluates the effectiveness of the medications used for prevention of intrathecal (IT) morphine-induced pruritus after cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted from 1946 up to October 2019. We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared medications used for prevention of pruritus with a control group in women undergoing cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia with IT morphine. The primary outcome examined was the incidence of pruritus up to 24 h after cesarean delivery. Dichotomous data were extracted and summarized using odds ratios (OR) and 95% credible intervals (CrI) with Bayesian random effects network meta-analysis model. The GRADE approach was used to evaluate quality of the studies and effect evidence.

RESULTS

Of the 26 studies included in the systematic review, 21 studies with a total of 2594 patients were included in the network meta-analysis [prophylaxis, n = 1603 (62%) vs. control, n = 991 (38%)]. These studies investigated seven classes of drugs including serotonin-receptor antagonists, dopamine-receptor antagonists, opioid agonist-antagonists, opioid-receptor antagonists, histamine-receptor antagonists, propofol and celecoxib. The network meta-analysis showed that serotonin-receptor antagonists' prophylaxis [control vs. prophylaxis: 60% vs. 47%; OR (95% CrI): 2.69 (1.43-5.36)] and opioid agonist-antagonists prophylaxis [control vs. prophylaxis: 72% vs. 47%; OR (95% CrI): 4.57 (1.67-12.91)] decreased the incidence of pruritus compared to the control group. Although all included studies were at low risk of bias, the quality of the overall network meta-analysis pooled estimates was low.

CONCLUSION

This bayesian network meta-analysis of RCTs demonstrates serotonin-receptor antagonists and opioid agonist-antagonists may prevent pruritus in women undergoing cesarean delivery with intrathecal morphine compared to control group. However, further RCTs of adequate power and clearly defined end points are warranted.

Cross-talk between Human Spinal Cord μ-opioid Receptor 1Y Isoform and Gastrin-releasing Peptide Receptor Mediates Opioid-induced Scratching Behavior

BACKGROUND

Although spinal opioids are safe and effective, pruritus is common and distressing. The authors previously demonstrated in mouse spinal cord that interactions between μ-opioid receptor isoform 1D and gastrin releasing peptide receptor mediate morphine-induced scratch. The C-terminal of 1D inhibits morphine-induced scratch without affecting analgesia. The authors hypothesize that human spinal cord also contains itch-specific μ-opioid receptor isoforms which interact with gastrin releasing peptide receptor.

METHODS

Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction was performed on human spinal cord complimentary DNA from two human cadavers. Calcium responses to morphine (1 μM) were examined using calcium imaging microscopy on human cells (HEK293) coexpressing gastrin releasing peptide receptor and different human μ-opioid receptor isoforms. The authors assessed morphine-induced scratching behavior and thermal analgesia in mice following intrathecal injection of morphine (0.3 nmol) and a transactivator of transcription peptide designed from C-terminal sequences of 1Y isoform (0, 0.1, and 0.4 nmol).

RESULTS

The authors demonstrated 1Y expression in the spinal cord dorsal horn. Morphine administration evoked a calcium response (mean ± SD) (57 ± 13 nM) in cells coexpressing both gastrin releasing peptide receptor and the 1Y isomer. This was blocked by 10 μM naltrexone (0.7 ± 0.4 nM; P < 0.0001), 1 μM gastrin-releasing peptide receptor antagonist (3 ± 2 nM; P < 0.0001), or 200 μM 1Y-peptide (2 + 2 nM; P < 0.0001). In mice, 0.4 nmol 1Y-peptide significantly attenuated morphine-induced scratching behaviors (scratching bouts, vehicle vs. 1Y-peptide) (92 ± 31 vs. 38 ± 29; P = 0.011; n = 6 to 7 mice per group), without affecting morphine antinociception in warm water tail immersion test (% of maximum possible effect) (70 ± 21 vs. 67 ± 22; P = 0.80; n = 6 mice per group).

CONCLUSIONS

Human μ-opioid receptor 1Y isomer is a C-terminal splicing variant of Oprm1 gene identified in human spinal cord. Cross-talk between 1Y and gastrin releasing peptide receptor is required for mediating opioid-induced pruritus. Disrupting the cross talk may have implications for therapeutic uncoupling of desired analgesic effects from side effects of opioids.

Pruritus and postoperative nausea and vomiting after intrathecal morphine in spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section: Prospective cohort study

Background:

Spinal anaesthesia is a common anaesthetic technique for caesarean sections. Neuraxial opioids such as intrathecal morphine may cause common adverse effects (pruritus, post-operative nausea and vomiting).

Objectives:

We investigated the incidence, severity and need for treatment of pruritus and post-operative nausea and vomiting following administration of intrathecal morphine in spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section at KK Women’s and Children’s Hospital, Singapore.

Methods:

We conducted a prospective study involving 124 parturients who received intrathecal morphine in spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section from October 2012 to October 2014.

Results:

Seventy patients (56.5%) had moderate or severe pruritus (score 4–10), while 54 patients (43.5%) had no or mild pruritus (score 0–3). Mean (SD) value of the worst pruritus score reported on a scale of 0–10 was 4 (2.59). Only seven out of the 124 patients (5.6%) required treatment for pruritus. With respect to distress and bother from itching in the past 24 hours on a score of 0–4, the mean score reported was 1.7 (1.23). Fourteen (11.2%) patients reported vomiting, dry-retching and nausea. Six (4.8%) patients had nausea that interfered with activities of daily living. Four (3.2%) patients had clinically significant post-operative nausea and vomiting. Seven (5.6%) patients received anti-emetics. The average Overall Benefit of Analgesia Score was 3.8 (SD 2.6, min–max: 0–15). The average (SD) maternal satisfaction with pain relief and side effects was 84.9% (9.9%).

Conclusion:

There is a high incidence of pruritus, with most women reporting moderate to severe pruritus. The incidence of post-operative nausea and vomiting is low, and women reported good maternal satisfaction.

Ondansetron for neuraxial morphine-induced pruritus: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Pruritus is one of the most common adverse effects associated with neuraxial morphine. Ondansetron has been used to deal with the problem of neuraxial morphine-induced pruritus (NMIP). The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the preventive efficacy of ondansetron on NMIP.

METHODS

Online databases such as PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The primary outcome was the incidence of NMIP. We calculated risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous data. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was performed to avoid the risk of making a spurious claim of significant effect and to calculate the sample size necessary to make a robust claim of effect.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Our traditional meta-analysis showed that prophylactic ondansetron could significantly reduce the incidence of NMIP in non-obstetric patients (three trials, RR=0.63, 95% CI 0.45-0.89, P=.008) with modest heterogeneity (I² =47%) while it did not show the preventive efficacy of NMIP in obstetric patients (seven trials, RR=0.84, 95% CI 0.69-1.03, P=.10) with obvious heterogeneity (I²  =82% ). However, TSA demonstrates that more high-quality RCTs are still needed to confirm the preventive efficacy of ondansetron on NMIP in non-obstetric populations and to study whether ondansetron prevents NMIP in obstetric patients.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

Prophylactic ondansetron can significantly reduce the incidence of NMIP in non-obstetric patients but not in obstetric patients. However, more well-designed trials are still required to test the reliability of the results in our traditional meta-analysis.

Inadvertent spinal injection of ondansetron

Cesarean sections under spinal anesthesia are now a daily occurrence in most tertiary hospitals. We report the first published case of inadvertent spinal injection of ondansetron without any neurological sequelae in a patient undergoing elective Cesarean section under spinal anesthesia. She did not experience any permanent neurological sequelae, and also did not exhibit any central neuraxial opioid side effects-nausea, vomiting or pruritus. Vigilance is essential to reduce the risk of wrong route delivery of drugs, especially when presented in very similar-looking 2 mL ampules as in our institution.

Comparison of mirtazapine, gabapentin and ondansetron to prevent intrathecal morphine-induced pruritus

OBJECTIVE:

Antagonism of the central nervous system inhibitor neurotransmitter gamma-Aminobutyric acid (GABA) or serotonergic system activation is an important factor in the pathogenesis of intrathecal morphine-induced pruritus. This study tested the hypothesis that preoperative use of ondansetron, gabapentin or mirtazapine can prevent morphine-induced pruritus.

METHODS:

We randomly allocated 80 patients of American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) classification I and II physical status who were to undergo unilateral inguinal hernia or pilonidal sinus operations under spinal anesthesia into 4 equal groups. The first 3 groups received oral doses of 30 mg mirtazapine, 8 mg ondansetron, and 1200 mg gabapentin at 2 hours, 10 minutes, and 1 hour before surgery, respectively, and the fourth group was given a placebo. All patients received intrathecal injection of 15 mg of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine and 0.2 mg morphine. Pruritus was evaluated at 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, and 24 hours after intrathecal morphine administration, and details of presence, onset time, duration, localization, and severity of pruritus were recorded.

RESULTS:

Incidence of pruritus was significantly more frequent in the placebo group compared to ondansetron, gabapentin, and mirtazapine groups (70%, 55%, 35%, and 35%, respectively). In general, onset of pruritus was between 2 and 6 hours after intrathecal morphine injection; however, onset in the gabapentin group (mean±SD: 4.75±2.7 hours; p=0.019) was delayed compared to other groups. It was observed that pruritus persisted relatively longer in the ondansetron and placebo groups (mean±SD: 6±3.08; 5.82±2.96 hours, respectively; p=0.047). No statistical determination was made regarding location of pruritus. Severity of pruritus was greater in the placebo group (p=0.0001). Necessity for antipruritic treatment was not statistically significantly different between groups.

CONCLUSION:

Incidence and severity of intrathecal morphine-induced pruritus decreased with use of each of all 3 drugs compared to placebo.

Prophylactic administration of ondansetron in prevention of intrathecal morphine-induced pruritus and post-operative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing caesarean section

Background

Intrathecal morphine is commonly used for post caesarean analgesia. However, their use is frequently associated with the incidence of troublesome side effects such as nausea, vomiting and pruritus. Various mechanisms have been postulated for the opioid-induced pruritus, with a variety of medications with different mechanisms of actions formulated for the prevention and treatment. But, the results are inconsistent and hence the prevention and treatment of opioid-induced pruritus still remains a challenge. Ondansetron which is antiemetic, non-sedative and has no antianalgesic effect is an antagonist to 5-HT3 receptor, the receptor with which opioids interacts and imparts its effects. Ondansetron, thus, would be an attractive treatment strategy for both opioid-induced pruritus and post-operative nausea and vomiting.

Methods

After the approval from institutional review committee and written consent received from the patient, 50 healthy parturients of ASA I and II physical status undergoing caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia were enrolled for the study. They were randomly categorized into placebo group (2 ml normal saline) and treatment group (2 ml of 4 mg ondansetron), each group containing 25 patients. Pruritus and post-operative nausea and vomiting scores were recorded up to 24 hours after the administration of intrathecal morphine. Statistical analysis was performed using chi-square test.

Results

The incidence, severity and necessity of treatment for pruritus in the treatment group was significantly reduced compared to the placebo group (16% vs 88%). Similarly, the risk of post-operative nausea and vomiting in the treatment group was less compared to the placebo group (8% vs 56%).

Conclusion

Prophylactic administration of ondansetron to parturients receiving intrathecal morphine for post-operative analgesia provides a significant reduction of intrathecal morphine-induced pruritus and nausea and vomiting.

Trial registration

CTRI/2015/01/005362 registered on 07/01/2015 in Clinical Trials Registry – India (ctri.nic.in).