In Response: We appreciate Pavy et al.'s comments on our study. Although the rationale behind our study and that of Pavy et al.'s [1] is the same, the study designs are considerably different and certainly limit comparisons. In our study, we did not objectively differentiate the components of pain after cesarean delivery. However, it is our opinion that the results of Pavy et al. (2), that contraction pain was similar in study and control patients, clearly reflect pharmacokinetic limitations of their therapeutic regimen. It is unreasonable to expect similar effects for indomethacin suppositories and diclofenac intramuscular injections. Plasma levels determined by suppositories are much lower and delayed compared with those determined by intramuscular administration. Diclofenac suppositories are shown to be ineffective as a supplement to our small-dose intrathecal morphine technique, especially in the first 6 h postpartum (unpublished data). We do not agree that such a large dose of intrathecal morphine, as proposed by Pavy et al., is necessary to provide a comfortable postoperative period after cesarean delivery. In our study, no patient receiving diclofenac and morphine requested additional analgesic in the first 24 h postpartum. Although pain on movement was not objectively assessed, our patients were encouraged to ambulate 8 h postdelivery and were free to request pain medication. In their study, however, even with such a large dose of morphine (10 times larger) combined with indomethacin, some patients still requested additional analgesics. Pavy et al. counted on the effect of a very large dose of morphine and probably on a minor, yet clinically significant effect, of indomethacin, whereas we counted on a very small dose of morphine and on a significant effect of diclofenac. In our opinion, the advantages claimed by Pavy et al. in terms of efficacy of their therapeutic regimen are not clear. A major problem we see with the dose of morphine proposed by Pavy et al., which should limit the acceptance of their technique in clinical practice, is the high incidence of side effects. All but one of their patients exhibited itching on the first postoperative day; unfortunately, the authors did not report the severity of such a side effect. Additionally, some patients exhibited severe nausea (visual analog scale score 100) on the first postoperative day; unfortunately the authors again did not report the incidence. We have used this technique for >2 yr in >24,000 patients, with excellent clinical results and wide acceptance by patients, surgeons, and nursing staff. We strongly suggest that the smallest possible effective dose of intrathecal opioids should be used to avoid side effects, including respiratory depression. We agree with Pavy et al. that this will only be possible by using a multimodal approach to pain control. In that case, systemic nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs play a major role. A closer look at their mechanism of actions, especially at the clinical implications of their pharmacokinetics, is certainly worthwhile. Jose C. A. Carvalho, MD, PhD, FANZCA Antonio R. Amaro, MD Elizabeth L. Cappelli, MD Monica M. S. C. Cardoso, MD Ademar A. Prado, MD Department of Anesthesiology; Hospital e Maternidade Santa Joana; 04031-000 Sao Paulo, Brazil
Read full abstract