Bruera Eduardo, Sala Raul, Spruyt Odette, Palmer J Lynn, Zhang Tao, Willey Jie
The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas 77030, USA.
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2005 Jun;29(6):613-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2004.08.016.
This study compared the effects of nebulized versus subcutaneous morphine on the intensity of dyspnea in cancer patients. Patients with a resting dyspnea intensity > or =3 on a 0-10 scale (0=no dyspnea, 10=worst possible dyspnea) who received regular oral or parenteral opioids were included. On day 1, patients received either subcutaneous (SC) morphine plus nebulized placebo or nebulized morphine plus SC placebo. On day 2, a crossover was made. Dyspnea intensity, side effects, and blinded preference of treatment were assessed. Eleven patients completed the study. Dyspnea decreased from a median of 5 (range, 3-8) to 3 (range, 0-7) after SC morphine (P=0.025) and from 4 (range, 3-9) to 2 (range, 0-9) after nebulized morphine (P=0.007). There was no significant difference in dyspnea intensity between nebulized and subcutaneous morphine at 60 minutes. Unfortunately, due to limited sample size, there was insufficient power to rule out a significant difference between both routes of administration. Nebulized morphine offered dyspnea relief similar to that of SC morphine. Larger randomized controlled trials in patients with both continuous dyspnea and earlier stages of dyspnea are justified.
本研究比较了雾化吸入吗啡与皮下注射吗啡对癌症患者呼吸困难程度的影响。纳入静息时呼吸困难程度在0至10分制中≥3分(0分=无呼吸困难,10分=可能出现的最严重呼吸困难)且接受常规口服或胃肠外阿片类药物治疗的患者。在第1天,患者接受皮下注射吗啡加雾化安慰剂或雾化吗啡加皮下注射安慰剂。在第2天,进行交叉治疗。评估呼吸困难程度、副作用和对治疗的盲法偏好。11名患者完成了研究。皮下注射吗啡后,呼吸困难程度从中位数5(范围3至8)降至3(范围0至7)(P=0.025);雾化吸入吗啡后,呼吸困难程度从4(范围3至9)降至2(范围0至9)(P=0.007)。在60分钟时,雾化吸入吗啡与皮下注射吗啡的呼吸困难程度无显著差异。遗憾的是,由于样本量有限,没有足够的效力排除两种给药途径之间的显著差异。雾化吸入吗啡缓解呼吸困难的效果与皮下注射吗啡相似。对持续呼吸困难和呼吸困难早期阶段的患者进行更大规模的随机对照试验是有必要的。