Summary and Conclusions
Initially, 51 consecutive patients who had undergone hemorrhoidectomy were included in a double-blind, cross-over study to determine whether or not 50 mg. of meperidine would provide postoperative analgesia equivalent to 100 mg. of meperidine when the 50 mg. of meperidine was supplemented with 50 mg. of promethazine. Postoperatively, 40 of the 51 patients completed the cross-over study, nine required only one analgesic dose, and two did not require any medication for the relief of pain.
The results were tabulated and the data were interpreted on a statistical basis, according to analytic methods of Beecher and Herdan. There was no significant difference between the relief of pain afforded by one preparation as compared to the relief produced by the other. This was true for members of the cross-over group and members of the total group.
The side effects observed were insignificant, except for the marked decrease in blood pressure noted in several patients after the administration of meperidine. It would appear that the use of promethazine with meperidine diminishes the characteristic effect of meperidine. The addition of promethazine to the meperidine did not increase the number of patients who slept after the administration of the medication.
It can be concluded, therefore, that the addition of promethazine to a given amount of narcotic analgesic agent affords relief of pain comparable to that obtained by double the amount of narcotic analgesic agent alone. This conclusion substantiates what has been suggested in medical literature; namely, that promethazine potentiates the analgesic action of a narcotic agent.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adelman, M. H., Elliott Jacobson, P. A. Lief and S. A. Miller: Promethazine hydrochloride in surgery and obstetrics. J.A.M.A.169: 73, 1959.
Beecher, H. K.: Measurement of Subjective Responses: Quantitative Effects of Drugs. New York, Oxford University Press, 1959, p. 73.
Carroll, J. J. and R. S. Moir: Use of promethazine (phenergan) hydrochloride in obstetrics: Report of a two and one-half year survey. J.A.M.A.168: 2218, 1958.
Cullen, S. C.: Current comment and case reports: A new use for promethazine hydrochloride. Anesthesiology.19: 402, 1958.
Drill, V. A. [Ed.]: Pharmacology in Medicine: A Collaborative Textbook. New York, Blakiston Division, 1958, p. 231.
Egbert, L. D., M. L. Norton, J. E. Eckenhoff and R. D. Dripps: A comparison in man of the effects of promethazine, secobarbital, and meperidine alone and in combination in certain respiratory functions and for use in preanesthetic medication. South. M. J.51: 1173, 1958.
Gruber, C. M., E. R. Hart and C. M. Gruber, Jr.: The pharmacology and toxicology of ethyl ester of 1-methyl-4-phenylpiperidine-4-carboxylic acid (demerol). J. Pharmacol. & Exper. Therap.73: 319, 1941.
Halpern, B. N. and R. Ducrot: Recherches expérimentales sur une série chimique de corps doués de propriétés antihistaminiques puissantes: Les derivés de la thiodiphénylamine (T.D.A.). Compt. rend. Soc. biol.140: 361, 1956.
Halpern, B. N. and Jean Hamburger: A new synthetic anti-histamine substance derived from phenothiazine (phenergan, 3, 277 R.P.). Canad. M.A.J.59: 322, 1948.
Herdan, G.: Statistics of Therapeutic Trials. New York, Elsevier Publishing Company, 1955, Chapter 6.
Potts, C. R. and J. C. Ullery: Maternal and fetal effects of obstetrical analgesia: A scientific exhibit. (Unpublished data.)
Sadove, M. S. and T. S. Frye: Preoperative sedation and production of a quiescent state in children. J.A.M.A.164: 1729, 1957.
Sheiner, Ben and B. D. Pinck: Promethazine drip in the postoperative management of suprapubic prostatectomy. J.A.M.A.171: 1955, 1959.
Smith, R. M. and Mervyn Jeffries: The evaluation of sedative agents for preoperative use in children. Anesth. & Analg.38: 166, 1959.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
About this article
Cite this article
Winne, B.E., Pineda, J.R. & Bacon, H.E. Analgesic efficacy of meperidine hydrochloride used alone and in combination with promethazine hydrochloride. Dis Colon Rectum 4, 121–124 (1961). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02616698
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02616698