Carvalho Ana Carolina, Sebold Fábio Jean Goulart, Calegari Patrícia Mello Garcia, Oliveira Benhur Heleno de, Schuelter-Trevisol Fabiana
Universidade do Sul de Santa Catarina (Unisul), Curso de Medicina, Campus Tubarão, Tubarão, SC, Brasil.
Hospital Nossa Senhora da Conceição (HNSC), Anestesiologia, Tubarão, SC, Brasil.
Braz J Anesthesiol. 2018 Mar-Apr;68(2):122-127. doi: 10.1016/j.bjan.2017.09.005. Epub 2017 Oct 31.
Pain is an aggravating factor of postoperative morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of methadone versus morphine using the numerical rating scale of pain and postoperative on-demand analgesia in patients undergoing myocardial revascularization.
A randomized, double-blind, parallel clinical trial was performed with patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting. The subjects were randomly divided into two groups: morphine group and methadone group. At the end of cardiac surgery, 0.1 mg.kg adjusted body weight of methadone or morphine was administered intravenously. Patients were referred to the ICU, where the following was assessed: extubation time, time to first analgesic request, number of analgesic and antiemetic drug doses within 36 h, numerical pain scale at 12, 24, and 36 h postoperatively, and occurrence of adverse effects.
Each group comprised 50 patients. Methadone showed 22% higher efficacy than morphine as it yielded a number-needed-to-treat score of 6 and number-needed-to-harm score of 16. The methadone group showed a mean score of 1.9 ± 2.2 according to the numerical pain scale at 24 h after surgery, whereas as the morphine group showed a mean score of 2.9 ± 2.6 ( = 0.029). The methadone group required less morphine (29%) than the morphine group (43%) ( = 0.002). However, the time to first analgesic request in the postoperative period was 145.9 ± 178.5 min in the methadone group, and 269.4 ± 252.9 in the morphine group ( = 0.005).
Methadone was effective for analgesia in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting without extracorporeal circulation.
疼痛是术后发病和死亡的一个加重因素。本研究的目的是使用疼痛数字评分量表和术后按需镇痛,比较美沙酮与吗啡对接受心肌血运重建术患者的影响。
对接受冠状动脉搭桥术的患者进行了一项随机、双盲、平行临床试验。受试者被随机分为两组:吗啡组和美沙酮组。在心脏手术结束时,静脉注射按调整体重计算的0.1mg/kg美沙酮或吗啡。患者被转入重症监护病房(ICU),在那里评估以下指标:拔管时间、首次镇痛需求时间、36小时内镇痛和止吐药物剂量、术后12、24和36小时的疼痛数字评分以及不良反应的发生情况。
每组包括50名患者。美沙酮的疗效比吗啡高22%,其治疗所需人数评分为6,伤害所需人数评分为16。美沙酮组在术后24小时根据疼痛数字评分量表的平均评分为1.9±2.2,而吗啡组的平均评分为2.9±2.6(P=0.029)。美沙酮组比吗啡组所需的吗啡量少(29%对43%)(P=0.002)。然而,美沙酮组术后首次镇痛需求时间为145.9±178.5分钟,吗啡组为269.4±252.9分钟(P=0.005)。
美沙酮对未进行体外循环的冠状动脉搭桥术患者的镇痛有效。