Untersuchungen zum differenzierten Einsatz von Nichtopioiden zur postoperativen Analgesie I - Quantifizierung des analgetischen Effektes von Metamizol mittels der patientenkontrollierten Analgesie

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate: 1. Whether the perioperative administration of metamizol causes a significant reduction in postoperative opioid requirements within the first 24 h after surgery. 2. The opioid-sparing effect after different types of operations. 3. Whether preoperative application of metamizol causes a significant reduction of the pain-score immediately after operation. METHODS: In a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled study, 117 patients, scheduled for minor orthopaedic or laparoscopic surgery or other operations (mainly resection of the thyroid gland and inguinal herniotomies) received either metamizol (1 g/100 ml NaCl 0.9%) or placebo (100 ml NaCl 0.9%) intravenously over 15 min in three separate doses: the first dose was given just before induction and the others 6 h and 12 h later. After surgery all patients were allowed to self-administer buprenorphine from a PCA (patient-controlled analgesia) pump (Bolus: 30 microgram, lockout: 5 min in the recovery room, 30 min on the ward). Every hour for the first 6 h and after 24 h, cumulated doses of buprenorphine, pain scores (0-10), blood pressure, pulse and side effects were recorded. RESULTS: After minor orthopaedic and laparoscopic surgery, metamizol-treated patients had significantly less pain immediately after surgery and used a significantly lower cumulated dose of opioid in the first 24 h after surgery (-20% and -67% respectively) than patients receiving placebo. After the other types of surgery no analgesic effect could be established. CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative administration of metamizol results in better pain relief and significantly lower buprenorphine requirements particularly after laparoscopic operations. To achieve a significant pain reduction immediately after the operation, the first dose should be applied before induction.

[1]  F. Dexter Analysis of Statistical Tests to Compare Doses of Analgesics among Groups , 1994, Anesthesiology.

[2]  J. Dipiro,et al.  Buprenorphine versus morphine for patient-controlled analgesia after cholecystectomy. , 1993, Surgery, gynecology & obstetrics.

[3]  S. Shapiro,et al.  Risks of agranulocytosis and aplastic anemia in relation to the use of cardiovascular drugs: The International Agranulocytosis and Aplastic Anemia Study , 1991, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[4]  H. Zetterström,et al.  Sublingual buprenorphine as postoperative analgesic: a double‐blind comparison with pethidine , 1990, Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica.

[5]  O. Ravlo,et al.  Pain relief after major abdominal surgery: a double-blind controlled comparison of sublingual buprenorphine, intramuscular buprenorphine, and intramuscular meperidine. , 1986, Anesthesia and analgesia.

[6]  I. Jurna,et al.  Activation of inhibition from the periaqueductal grey matter mediates central analgesic effect of metamizol (dipyrone) , 1986, Pain.

[7]  M. Rosen,et al.  "Patient demand" postoperative analgesia with buprenorphine. Comparison between sublingual and i.m. administration. , 1986, British journal of anaesthesia.

[8]  K. Lehmann,et al.  Postoperative On-Demand-Analgesie mit Alfentanil, Buprenorphin und Fentanyl: Plasmakonzentrationen und Effektivität , 1986 .

[9]  M. S. Patel,et al.  Management of pain after abdominal surgery: dipyrone compared with pethidine. , 1980, British journal of clinical pharmacology.

[10]  P. Chandra,et al.  Dipyrone for treatment of post‐operative pain , 1973, Anaesthesia.