Lack of interaction between metoclopramide and morphine in vitro and in mice

Impact of Morphine Treatment With and Without Metoclopramide Coadministration on Myocardial and Microvascular Injury in Acute Myocardial Infarction: Insights From the Randomized MonAMI Trial

Background

Intravenous morphine administration can adversely affect platelet inhibition induced by P2Y₁₂ receptor inhibitors after acute myocardial infarction. In contrast, some evidence suggests that opioid agonists may have cardioprotective effects on the myocardium. The aim of this prospective, randomized MonAMI (Impact of Morphine Treatment With and Without Metoclopramide Coadministration on Platelet Inhibition in Acute Myocardial Infarction) trial was, therefore, to investigate the impact of morphine with or without metoclopramide coadministration on myocardial and microvascular injury.

Methods and Results

Patients with acute myocardial infarction (n=138) were assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to ticagrelor 180 mg plus: (1) intravenous morphine 5 mg (morphine group); (2) intravenous morphine 5 mg and metoclopramide 10 mg (morphine+metoclopramide group); or (3) intravenous placebo (control group) administered before primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging was performed in 104 patients on day 1 to 4 after the index event. Infarct size was significantly smaller in the morphine only group as compared with controls (percentage of left ventricular mass, 15.5 versus 17.9; P=0.047). Furthermore, the number of patients with microvascular obstruction was significantly lower after morphine administration (28% versus 54%; P=0.022) and the extent of microvascular obstruction was smaller (percentage of left ventricular mass, 0 versus 0.74; P=0.037). In multivariable regression analysis, morphine administration was independently associated with a reduced risk for the occurrence of microvascular obstruction (odds ratio, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.14–0.93 [P=0.035]). There was no significant difference in infarct size (P=0.491) and extent (P=0.753) or presence (P=0.914) of microvascular obstruction when comparing the morphine+metoclopramide group with the control group.

Conclusions

In this randomized study, intravenous administration of morphine before primary percutaneous coronary intervention resulted in a significant reduction of myocardial and microvascular damage following acute myocardial infarction. This effect was not observed in the morphine plus metoclopramide group.

Registration

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02627950.

The Influence of Metoclopramide on Trigeminovascular Nociception: Possible Anti-migraine Mechanism of Action

Metoclopramide is widely used as an abortive migraine therapy due to the advantage of having not only antiemetic, but also analgesic properties. Despite the proven clinical efficacy of metoclopramide in acute migraine, the mechanism of its anti-cephalalgic action has not been entirely elucidated. Taking into account the key role of the trigeminovascular system activation in migraine pathophysiology, we aimed to investigate metoclopramide effects on the excitability of central trigeminovascular neurons and neurogenic dural vasodilation using valid electrophysiological and neurovascular models of trigeminovascular nociception. Extracellular recordings of the activity of second-order dura-sensitive neurons were made in the trigeminocervical complex (TCC) of 16 anaesthetised rats. Cumulative metoclopramide infusion (three steps in 30 min intervals, 5 mg/kg i.v. per step, n = 8) significantly and dose-dependently suppressed both ongoing firing of the TCC neurons and their responses to dural electrical stimulation, maximally to 30%[0-49%] (median[Q1-Q3]) and 4%[0-30%] of the initial level, respectively (both p = 0.001, compared to saline (n = 8)). By contrast, the neurogenic dural vasodilation studied in a separate group of 12 rats was not significantly affected by cumulative infusion of metoclopramide (5 mg/kg i.v. per step, n = 6) compared to both baseline values and the vehicle group (n = 6) (all p > 0.05). These results provide evidence that metoclopramide is unable to affect the peripheral response to trigeminovascular activation, but it does suppress the central response, which is highly predictive of anti-migraine action. Thus, here we show the neurophysiological mechanism underlying the therapeutic efficacy of metoclopramide in migraine.