Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Intranasal Diamorphine as an Alternative to Intramuscular Morphine

Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Aspects

  • Leading Article
  • Published:
Clinical Pharmacokinetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Diamorphine is a semisynthetic derivative of morphine that is currently licensed for use in the treatment of moderate to severe acute pain, administered by the intramuscular, intravenous or subcutaneous routes. It is highly water-soluble and has a number of properties that render it suitable for administration via the nasal route. Administration via the intranasal route is well described for other drugs, but has only recently been evaluated in a clinical setting for diamorphine. A well-tolerated and rapidly effective analgesic agent has proven elusive in the paediatric setting.

The pharmacokinetic profile of intranasal diamorphine in adults has been systematically studied. It is rapidly and dose-dependently absorbed as a dry powder, with peak plasma concentrations occurring within 5 minutes, and has a similar pharmacokinetic profile to that of intramuscular diamorphine. It is rapidly converted to 6-acetylmorphine (peak concentrations within 5–10 minutes) and thence to morphine (peak concentrations within 1 hour). The pharmacodynamic properties of intranasal diamorphine have also been studied in comparison with intramuscular diamorphine. Intranasal and intramuscular administration of diamorphine resulted in similar physiological responses (including pupil diameter, respiration rate and temperature). Changes in behavioural measures (including euphoria, sedation and dysphoria) were also similar. Intranasal administration of diamorphine, therefore, produces the expected drug effects on the same timescale and of the same magnitude as intramuscular injection.

Intranasal diamorphine has been clinically evaluated in a randomised controlled trial versus intramuscular morphine in the setting of acute orthopaedic pain in children with fractures. Intranasal diamorphine provided the same overall degree of pain relief as intramuscular morphine, but with a quicker onset of action. It was found to be well tolerated with an acceptable safety profile. It has also been studied in the setting of patient-controlled analgesia for postoperative pain in adults, with encouraging results.

The pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of intranasal diamorphine, and particularly the ability to administer it without a needle (and therefore reduce the incidence of transmissible infection), have made this a popular route for abuse amongst opioid addicts. In this setting, however, the intranasal route is not free from adverse events, including deaths.

The primary clinical need in the paediatric population is for a well tolerated, effective and expedient analgesic agent that is safe to use; intranasal diamorphine has pharmacokinetic properties that would make it suitable for such a clinical indication and, in clinical evaluations to date, appears to be promising.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Table I
Table II
Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bruce SD, editor. Diamorphine: its chemistry, pharmacology and clinical use. Cambridge, UK: Woodhead-Faulkner, 1988

    Google Scholar 

  2. Anon. Martindale: the extra pharmacopoeia. 31st ed. London: Royal Pharmaceutical Society, 1996

  3. Karl HW, Keiffer AT, Rosenberger JL, et al. Comparison of the safety and efficacy of intranasal midazolam and sufentanil for pre-induction of anaesthesia in paediatric patients. Anaesthesiology 1992; 76: 209–15

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Walbergh EJ, Wills RJ, Eckliert J. Plasma concentrations of midazolam in children following intranasal administration. Anaesthesiology 1991; 74: 233

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Cauna N, Hinderer KH. Fine structure of blood vessels of human respiratory mucosa. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1969; 78: 865–79

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Williams PL, Warwick R. Grays anatomy. 36th ed. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone, 1980

    Google Scholar 

  7. Simini B. Patients perceptions of pain with spinal, intramuscular and venous injections [letter]. Lancet 2000; 355: 1076

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Robinson SL, Rowbotham DJ, Smith G. Morphine compared with diamorphine: a comparison of dose requirements and side effects after hip surgery. Anaesthesia 1991; 46: 538–40

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Adverse Drug Reactions On-line Information Tracking (ADROIT). Drug analysis print. London: Medicines Control Agency, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Mitchell J, James MA, Lunn JN. A fundamental problem of consent. BMJ 1995; 310: 43–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Cone EJ. Recent discoveries in pharmacokinetics of drug abuse. Toxicol Lett 1998; 102-103: 97–101

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Grahame-Smith DG, Aronson JK. Oxford textbook of clinical pharmacology and drug therapy. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002

    Google Scholar 

  13. Cone EJ, Holicky BA, Grant TM, et al. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of intranasal “snorted” heroin. J Anal Toxicol 1993; 17: 327–37

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Skopp G, Ganssmann B, Cone EJ, et al. Plasma concentrations of heroin and morphine related metabolites after intranasal and intramuscular administration. J Anal Toxicol 1997; 21: 105–11

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Black DJ. Handbook of clinical pharmacokinetic data. Basingstoke, UK: MacMillan Publishers Ltd, 1992

    Google Scholar 

  16. Dollery C, editor. Therapeutic drugs. 2nd ed. London: Churchill Livingstone, 1999

    Google Scholar 

  17. Katzung BG. Basic and clinical pharmacology. 8th ed. USA: McGraw-Hill, 2001

    Google Scholar 

  18. Sirtoli CR, editor. Clinical pharmacology. UK: McGraw-Hill International Ltd, 2000

    Google Scholar 

  19. Anon. ABPI compendium of data sheets and summaries of product characteristics. London: Datapharm Publications Ltd, 1999-2000

  20. Sawynok J. The therapeutic use of heroin: a review of the pharmacological literature. Can J Physiol Pharmacol 1986; 64(1): 1–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Goodman Gilman A, Rall TW, Nies AS, et al., editors. The pharmacological basis of therapeutics. 8th ed. Singapore: McGraw-Hill, 1992

    Google Scholar 

  22. Inturrisi CE, Schultz M, Shin S, et al. Evidence from opiate binding studies that heroin acts through its metabolites. Life Sci 1984; 33 Suppl. 1: 773–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Cone EJ, Jufer R, Darwin WD. Forensic drug testing for opiates: VII. urinary excretion profile of intranasal (snorted) heroin. J Anal Toxicol 1996; 20: 379–92

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Haertzen CA. An overview of the addiction research centre inventory (ARCI): an appendix and manual of scales. DHEW Pub. No. (ADM): 79. Washington, DC: Department of Health Education and Welfare, 1974

    Google Scholar 

  25. Wilson JA, Kendall JM, Cornelius P. Intranasal diamorphine for paediatric analgesia: assessment of safety and efficacy. J Accid Emerg Med 1997; 14: 70–2

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Kendall JM, Reeves BC, Latter VS. Multi-centre randomised controlled trial of nasal diamorphine for analgesia in children and teenagers with clinical fractures. BMJ 2001; 322: 261–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Hallett A, O’Higgins F, Francis V, et al. Patient controlled intranasal diamorphine for post operative pain: an acceptability study. Anaesthesia 2000; 55: 532–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Ward M, Minto G, Alexander-Williams JM. A comparison of patient-controlled analgesia administered by the intravenous or intranasal route during the early post-operative period. Anaesthesia 2002; 57(1): 48–52

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. ICH Secretariat. ICH harmonised tripartite guideline for good clinical practice. Surrey: Brookwood Medical, 1996

    Google Scholar 

  30. Ljung B, Andreasson S. Comparison of midazolam nasal spray to nasal drops for the sedation of children. J Nucl Med Technol 1996; 24(1): 32–4

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Huskisson EC. Measurement of pain. Lancet 1974; II: 1127–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. French JS, Safford J. Aids and intranasal heroin [letter]. Lancet 1989; I: 1082

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. Trends and patterns in alcohol and drug abuse in Maryland, fiscal year. Maryland: Alcohol and Drug Abuse Administration, 1991

    Google Scholar 

  34. Carpenter MJ, Chutuape MA, Stitzer ML. Heroin snorters versus injectors: comparison of drug use and treatment outcome in age matched samples. Drug Alcohol Depend 1998; 53: 11–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Darke S, Ross J. Fatal heroin overdoses resulting from non injecting routes of administration, NSW, Australia, 1992–1996. Addiction 2000; (4): 569–73

    Google Scholar 

  36. Zuckerman GB, Ruiz DC, Keller IA, et al. Neurological complications following intranasal administration of heroin in an adolescent. Ann Pharmacother 1996; 30(7–8): 778–81

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. McCreary M, Emerman C, Hanna J, et al. Acute myelopathy following intranasal insuflation of heroin: a case report. Neurology 2000; 55(2): 316–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Schoser BJ, Groden C. Sub-acute onset of occulogyric crisis and generalised dystonia following intranasal administration of heroin. Addiction 1999; 94(3): 431–4

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Karne S, D’Ambrosio C, Einarsson O, et al. Hypersensitivity pneumonitis induced by intranasal heroin use. Am J Med 1999; 107(4): 392–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Downie JB, Dicostanzo DP, Cohen SR. Pemphigus vegetansneumann: variant associated with intranasal heroin abuse. J Am Acad Dermatol 1998; 39(5 part 2): 872–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Mitterhofer AP, Antonelli M, Genuini I, et al. High dose intranasal snorted heroin: a new cause of pancreatitis. Pancreas 1998; 17(2): 213–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Davis M, Crawford I. Nasal diamorphine for acute pain relief in children. Emerg Med J 2001; 18(4): 271

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors have received no funding and have no conflict of interest directly relevant to the content of this review.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Emergency Department, Frenchay Hospital, Frenchay Park Road, Bristol, BS16 1LE, UK

    Jason M. Kendall

  2. University College London Clinical Research Network, Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust, London, UK

    Victoria S. Latter

Authors
  1. Jason M. Kendall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Victoria S. Latter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jason M. Kendall.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kendall, J.M., Latter, V.S. Intranasal Diamorphine as an Alternative to Intramuscular Morphine. Clin Pharmacokinet 42, 501–513 (2003). https://doi.org/10.2165/00003088-200342060-00001

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00003088-200342060-00001

Keywords

Search

Navigation