Safety and Efficacy of Vocacapsaicin for Management of Postsurgical Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Nonopioid management of postsurgical pain remains a major unmet need. Few studies have evaluated transient receptor potential vanilloid subfamily member 1 agonists for analgesia after surgery. This study examines intraoperative vocacapsaicin, a novel prodrug of the transient receptor potential vanilloid subfamily member 1 agonist capsaicin, in a validated model of postsurgical pain. METHODS: This was a triple-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging trial in patients undergoing bunionectomy. Patients were randomized 1:1:1:1 to surgical site administration of 14 ml of placebo or one of three vocacapsaicin concentrations: 0.30, 0.15, or 0.05 mg/ml. The prespecified primary endpoint was the area-under-the-curve of the numerical rating scale pain score at rest through 96 h for the 0.30 mg/ml group. Prespecified ordered, secondary endpoints for the 0.30 mg/ml group included the percentage of patients who did not require opioids from 0 to 96 h, total opioid consumption through 96 h, and the area-under-the-curve of the numerical rating scale pain score for the first week. RESULTS: The 147 patients were randomized. During the first 96 h, vocacapsaicin (0.30 mg/ml) reduced pain at rest by 33% versus placebo (primary endpoint, 95% CI [10%, 52%], effect size [Cohen's d] = 0.61, P = 0.005). Of patients receiving vocacapsaicin (0.30 mg/ml), 26% did not require postoperative opioids for analgesia (P = 0.025) versus 5% of patients receiving placebo. Vocacapsaicin (0.30 mg/ml) reduced opioid consumption over the first 96 h by 50% versus placebo (95% CI [26%, 67%], effect size = 0.76, P = 0.002). Vocacapsaicin (0.30 mg/ml) reduced pain over the first week by 37% versus placebo (95% CI [12%, 57%], effect size = 0.62, P = 0.004). The treatment effect persisted for at least 2 weeks. All study endpoints showed an administered concentration-versus-response relationship. Vocacapsaicin was well tolerated with no differences between groups in any safety parameter. CONCLUSIONS: A single, local administration of vocacapsaicin during surgery reduced pain and opioid consumption for at least 96 h after surgery compared to control.

Pharmacokinetics and Safety of INL-001 (Bupivacaine HCl) Implants Compared with Bupivacaine HCl Infiltration After Open Unilateral Inguinal Hernioplasty.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical site infiltration with bupivacaine HCl results in short-lived analgesia for postsurgical pain and carries the risk of systemic bupivacaine toxicity due to accidental intravascular injection. INL-001 is a bupivacaine HCl collagen-matrix implant that provides extended delivery of bupivacaine directly at the site and avoids the risk of accidental injection. Here, we examine the pharmacokinetic (PK) and safety profile of INL-001 placement during unilateral open inguinal hernioplasty. METHODS: This multicenter, single-blind study (NCT03234374) enrolled patients undergoing open inguinal hernioplasty to receive three INL-001 implants, each containing 100 mg bupivacaine HCl (n = 34) or local infiltration of 0.25% bupivacaine HCl 175 mg (n = 16). Acetaminophen was provided in the postsurgical period and supplemented by opioids for breakthrough pain, as needed. PK blood samples were taken before surgery and up to 96 h after drug administration. RESULTS: INL-001 demonstrated a prolonged rate of absorption and clearance of bupivacaine compared with 0.25% bupivacaine HCl 175 mg, as demonstrated by a longer time to peak plasma concentration and terminal elimination half-life. Peak plasma concentration with INL-001 300 mg was comparable to bupivacaine HCl 175 mg and well below levels associated with systemic bupivacaine toxicity. The most common adverse events (AEs) in both groups were associated with general anesthesia and the postsurgical setting. No AE was related to the implant, including those associated with wound healing. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate that INL-001 provides immediate and extended delivery of bupivacaine and is well tolerated in patients undergoing open inguinal hernioplasty with no adverse effect on wound healing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier, NCT03234374.

Safety and Efficacy of Bupivacaine HCl Collagen-Matrix Implant (INL-001) in Open Inguinal Hernia Repair: Results from Two Randomized Controlled Trials.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical site infiltration with bupivacaine results in short-lived analgesia. The MATRIX-1 and MATRIX-2 studies examined the efficacy and safety of the bioresorbable bupivacaine HCl collagen-matrix implant (INL-001) for postsurgical pain after open inguinal hernia repair. INL-001, designed to provide early and extended delivery of bupivacaine, provides prolonged duration of perioperative analgesia. METHODS: In two phase 3 double-blind studies [MATRIX-1 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02523599) and MATRIX-2 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02525133)], patients undergoing open tension-free mesh inguinal hernia repair were randomized to receive 300-mg bupivacaine (three INL-001 100-mg bupivacaine HCl collagen-matrix implants) (MATRIX-1 n = 204; MATRIX-2 n = 213) or three placebo collagen-matrix implants (MATRIX-1 n = 101; MATRIX-2 n = 106) during surgery. Postsurgical medication included scheduled acetaminophen and as-needed opioids. RESULTS: Patients who received INL-001 in both studies reported statistically significantly lower pain intensity (P ≤ 0.004; primary end point) and opioid analgesic use (P < 0.0001) through 24-h post-surgery versus those who received a placebo collagen-matrix. Patients who received INL-001 reported lower pain intensity through 72 h (P = 0.0441) for the two pooled studies. In both studies, more of the patients (28-42%) who received INL-001 used no opioid medication 0-24, 0-48, and 0-72 h post-surgery versus those who received a placebo collagen-matrix (12-22%). Among patients who needed opioid medication, patients receiving INL-001 used fewer opioids than those who received a placebo collagen-matrix through 24 h in both studies (P < 0.0001) and through 48 h in MATRIX-2 (P = 0.0003). Most adverse events were mild or moderate, without evidence of bupivacaine toxicity or deleterious effects on wound healing. CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that INL-001 results in post-inguinal hernia repair analgesia that is temporally aligned with the period of maximal postsurgical pain and may reduce the need for opioids while offering a favorable safety profile. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers, NCT02523599; NCT02525133. FUNDING: Innocoll Pharmaceuticals. Plain language summary available for this article.

Amisulpride Prevents Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in Patients at High Risk: A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative nausea and vomiting causes distress for patients and can prolong care requirements. Consensus guidelines recommend use of multiple antiemetics from different mechanistic classes as prophylaxis in patients at high risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting. The prophylactic efficacy of the dopamine D2/D3 antagonist amisulpride in combination with other antiemetics was investigated. METHODS: This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, international, multicenter trial was conducted in 1,147 adult surgical patients having three or four postoperative nausea and vomiting risk factors. Patients were randomized to receive either intravenous amisulpride (5 mg) or matching placebo at induction of general anesthesia, in addition to one standard, nondopaminergic antiemetic, most commonly ondansetron or dexamethasone. Vomiting/retching, nausea, and use of rescue medication were recorded for 24 h after wound closure. The primary endpoint was complete response, defined as no emesis or rescue medication use in the 24-h postoperative period. RESULTS: Complete response occurred in 330 of 572 (57.7%) of the amisulpride group and 268 of 575 (46.6%) of the control group (difference 11.1 percentage points; 95% CI, 5.3 to 16.8; P < 0.001). The incidences of emesis (13.8% vs. 20.0%, P = 0.003), any nausea (50.0% vs. 58.3%, P = 0.002), significant nausea (37.1% vs. 47.7%, P < 0.001), and rescue medication use (40.9% vs. 49.4%, P = 0.002) were significantly lower in the amisulpride group. Adverse events and laboratory and electrocardiogram abnormalities occurred no more frequently with amisulpride than with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous amisulpride was safe and effective as prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting when given in combination with an antiemetic from another class to adult patients at high risk for suffering postoperative nausea and vomiting undergoing elective surgery under inhalational general anesthesia. VISUAL ABSTRACT: An online visual overview is available for this article at http://links.lww.com/ALN/B727.

An Open-Label Study of Sufentanil Sublingual Tablet 30 Mcg in Patients with Postoperative Pain.

Objective: To evaluate sufentanil sublingual tablet 30 mcg (SST 30 mcg) for postoperative pain in an older patient population with comorbidities. Design: Multicenter, open-label, single-arm study. Setting: Nine hospitals across the United States. Subjects: Adults aged ≥40 years who had undergone a surgical procedure. Methods: Patients with a postoperative pain intensity score ≥4 on an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS) were allowed to enter the study and receive SST 30 mcg as requested for pain (minimum 60-minute redosing interval) over the 12-hour study period. Efficacy was assessed by patient reports of pain intensity on the NRS and a five-point pain relief scale. Safety was monitored throughout the study; plasma sufentanil concentrations were also measured. The primary efficacy endpoint was the time-weighted summed pain intensity difference (SPID) to baseline over 12 hours (SPID12). Results: Of the 140 patients enrolled, 69% were American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Class II or III, 44% had a body mass index (BMI) ≥30 mg/kg2, and 29% had hepatic and/or renal impairment. Average age was 54.7 years (SD = 9.9 years), and average baseline pain intensity was 6.2 (SD = 1.9). The most common surgeries were abdominal (59%) and orthopedic (20%). The mean SPID12 was 36.0 (standard error of the mean = 2.2); mean scores were similar, regardless of age, sex, race, and BMI. From baseline, mean pain intensity decreased significantly starting 30 minutes postdose, and mean pain relief increased significantly starting 15 minutes postdose, remaining relatively stable through 12 hours (P < 0.001 at each time point). Four (3%) patients discontinued due to inadequate analgesia, and 45 (32%) patients had one or more adverse events that were considered possibly or probably related to the study drug. Mean plasma sufentanil concentrations were generally similar regardless of age, sex, BMI, or organ impairment status. Conclusions: SST 30 mcg was effective and well tolerated for the management of moderate-to-severe acute postoperative pain.

A randomized, Phase IIb study investigating oliceridine (TRV130), a novel µ-receptor G-protein pathway selective (µ-GPS) modulator, for the management of moderate to severe acute pain following abdominoplasty.

BACKGROUND: Oliceridine (TRV130), a novel µ-receptor G-protein pathway selective (µ-GPS) modulator, was designed to improve the therapeutic window of conventional opioids by activating G-protein signaling while causing low ß-arrestin recruitment to the µ receptor. This randomized, double-blind, patient-controlled analgesia Phase IIb study was conducted to investigate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of oliceridine compared with morphine and placebo in patients with moderate to severe pain following abdominoplasty (NCT02335294; oliceridine is an investigational agent not yet approved by the US Food and Drug Administration). METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive postoperative regimens of intravenous oliceridine (loading/patient-controlled demand doses [mg/mg]: 1.5/0.10 [regimen A]; 1.5/0.35 [regimen B]), morphine (4.0/1.0), or placebo with treatment initiated within 4 hours of surgery and continued as needed for 24 hours. RESULTS: Two hundred patients were treated (n=39, n=39, n=83, and n=39 in the oliceridine regimen A, oliceridine regimen B, morphine, and placebo groups, respectively). Patients were predominantly female (n=198 [99%]) and had a mean age of 38.2 years, weight of 71.2 kg, and baseline pain score of 7.7 (on 11-point numeric pain rating scale). Patients receiving the oliceridine regimens had reductions in average pain scores (model-based change in time-weighted average versus placebo over 24 hours) of 2.3 and 2.1 points, respectively (P=0.0001 and P=0.0005 versus placebo); patients receiving morphine had a similar reduction (2.1 points; P<0.0001 versus placebo). A lower prevalence of adverse events (AEs) related to nausea, vomiting, and respiratory function was observed with the oliceridine regimens than with morphine (P<0.05). Other AEs with oliceridine were generally dose-related and similar in nature to those observed with conventional opioids; no serious AEs were reported with oliceridine. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that oliceridine may provide effective, rapid analgesia in patients with moderate to severe postoperative pain, with an acceptable safety/tolerability profile and potentially wider therapeutic window than morphine.

A randomized, blinded, multicenter trial of a gentamicin vancomycin gel (DFA-02) in patients undergoing abdominal surgery.

BACKGROUND: SI is a significant medical problem. DFA-02 is an investigational bioresorbable modified release gel consisting of both gentamicin (16.8 mg/mL) and vancomycin (18.8 mg/mL). A Phase 2a study, where the drug was applied during surgical incision closure, suggested safety and tolerability but was not designed to assess its efficacy. STUDY DESIGN: In a Phase 2b randomized, blinded trial patients undergoing abdominal, primarily colorectal, surgery were randomized (4:1:1) to one of three study arms: DFA-02, matching placebo gel, or standard of care (SOC) involving irrigation of the wound with normal saline. The DFA-02 and placebo gel groups received up to 20 mL of study drug inserted above the fascia during wound closure, and were treated in a double-blind manner; the SOC group was treated in a single-blind manner. The primary endpoint was SSI (adjudicated centrally by a blinded committee) through postoperative day 30. RESULTS: Overall, 445 subjects (intention-to-treat) were randomized at 35 centers with 425 subjects completing the study and being evaluable. There were 67 SSIs (15.8%): 64.2% superficial, 7.5% deep, and 28.4% organ space. The incidence of SSI was not statistically significantly different between the DFA-02 and the placebo gel/SOC arms combined, 42/287 = 14.6% vs 25/138 = 18.1% (p = 0.36), respectively. Rehospitalization within 30 days was also similar between study groups (DFA-02 28.6%, placebo gel 21.4%, SOC 27.3%). CONCLUSION: In this multicenter, blinded, randomized trial with central adjudication, the gentamicin/vancomycin gel was not associated with a significant reduction in SSI. SUMMARY: Patients undergoing abdominal surgery were randomized to one of three study arms: DFA-02 gel consisting of both gentamicin and vancomycin, matching placebo gel, or standard of care (SOC). Of 425 patients completing the study at 35 sites the gentamicin/vancomycin gel was not associated with a significant reduction in SSI.

Sufentanil Sublingual Tablet 30 mcg for the Management of Pain Following Abdominal Surgery: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Phase-3 Study.

BACKGROUND: Results from a phase-3, prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluating sufentanil sublingual tablet 30 mcg (SST) for the management of pain after ambulatory abdominal surgery are presented. METHODS: Adults with American Society of Anesthesiologists status 1 to 3 scheduled to undergo abdominoplasty, open tension-free inguinal hernioplasty, or laparoscopic abdominal surgery under general or spinal anesthesia that did not include intrathecal opioids during the operation were eligible. Opioid-tolerant patients were excluded. The primary endpoint was the time-weighted summed pain intensity difference to baseline (SPID) over 12 hours. Secondary endpoints included SPID over 24 and 48 hours, total pain relief, and patient and healthcare professional (HCP) global assessments. RESULTS: Overall, 161 patients were randomized to SST (N = 107) or placebo (N = 54); pain scores were recorded for up to 48 hours. SPID 12 was higher (greater pain intensity reduction from baseline) in the SST group compared with placebo (25.8 vs. 13.1; P < 0.001, with a difference of 12.7 [95% confidence interval 7.16, 18.23]). In the SST group, a greater proportion of patients and HCPs responded "good" or "excellent" on the global assessments compared with placebo (P < 0.001 for both). There was a numerically, but not statistically, higher incidence of nausea and headache in the SST group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients following abdominal surgery in an ambulatory care setting, SST was an effective opioid analgesic in postoperative pain management. In addition, SST was well tolerated with mild-to-moderate side effects, similar to those found in placebo-treated patients.

Intravenous Amisulpride for the Prevention of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting: Two Concurrent, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Two essentially identical, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group phase III studies evaluated the efficacy of intravenous amisulpride, a dopamine D2/D3 antagonist, in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in adult surgical patients. METHODS: Adult inpatients undergoing elective surgery during general anesthesia and having at least two of the four Apfel risk factors for postoperative nausea and vomiting were enrolled at 9 U.S. and 10 European sites. A single 5-mg dose of amisulpride or matching placebo was given at induction of anesthesia. The primary endpoint was complete response, defined as no vomiting/retching and no use of antiemetic rescue medication in the 24-h postoperative period. Nausea incidence was a secondary endpoint. RESULTS: Across the two studies, 689 patients were randomized and dosed with study medication, of whom 626 were evaluable per protocol. In the U.S. study, 46.9% (95% CI, 39.0 to 54.9) of patients achieved complete response in the amisulpride group compared to 33.8% (95% CI, 26.2 to 42.0) in the placebo group (P = 0.026). In the European study, complete response rates were 57.4% (95% CI, 49.2 to 65.3) for amisulpride and 46.6% (95% CI, 38.8 to 54.6) for placebo (P = 0.070). Nausea occurred less often in patients who received amisulpride than those who received placebo. There was no clinically significant difference in the safety profile of amisulpride and placebo; in particular, there were no differences in terms of QT prolongation, extrapyramidal side effects, or sedation. CONCLUSIONS: One of the two trials demonstrated superiority, while pooling both in a post hoc change to the plan of analysis supported the hypothesis that amisulpride was safe and superior to placebo in reducing the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting in a population of adult inpatients at moderate to high risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetic dose escalation study of a gentamicin vancomycin gel in patients undergoing colorectal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Despite numerous interventions promulgated by the Surgical Care Improve Project (SCIP) and other organizations, surgical site infection (SSI) continues to be a significant medical problem. DFA-02 is a novel bioresorbable modified-release gel consisting of both gentamicin (16.8 mg/mL) and vancomycin (18.8 mg/mL) to be applied during surgical incision closure for the prevention of SSIs. The following double-blind phase 2a trial was designed to test the safety and tolerability of DFA-02. METHODS: At six US sites, the study planned to randomize 40 subjects undergoing colorectal surgery (30 with DFA-02, and eight with placebo gel) in four ascending dose cohorts (10-, 20-, 30-, and 40-mL study drug per wound). Safety was ascertained and serum pharmacokinetics (PK) was determined. RESULTS: Study enrollment was discontinued after the first three dose cohorts (10, 20, and 30 mL) as even very large incisions could not accommodate more than 20 mL of gel, leaving no scientific justification for the 40-mL cohort. DFA-02 was well tolerated and showed no evidence of local tissue reaction or impairment of wound healing. No serious AEs were deemed related to study drug. Systemic exposure to gentamicin and vancomycin remained well below levels considered to be at higher risk for oto- or nephrotoxicity. The maximal gentamicin and vancomycin levels observed were 2.36 and 0.684 µg/mL at 6 h, which were well below the prespecified stopping criteria of 12 and 20 µg/mL, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this small phase 2a study, the study drug was well tolerated and appeared to be free of serious adverse effects. Consistent with these findings, the PK values were consistent with gradual release of the antibiotics from the gel in the surgical site. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01496352.

Liposome Bupivacaine Femoral Nerve Block for Postsurgical Analgesia after Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The authors evaluated the efficacy of liposome bupivacaine in a femoral nerve block (FNB) after total knee arthroplasty. METHODS: Part 1: subjects received FNB with 20 ml liposome bupivacaine (67, 133, or 266 mg) or placebo. Part 2: subjects were randomized to FNB with liposome bupivacaine 266 mg or placebo. The primary outcome measure was area under the curve of the numeric rating scale score for pain intensity at rest through 72 h (AUC NRS-R0-72) with imputed scores after rescue medication. RESULTS: In part 1, FNB with liposome bupivacaine 266 mg (n = 24) resulted in analgesia similar to that obtained with 133 mg and was chosen for part 2. In part 2, least-squares mean (standard error) AUC NRS-R0-72 was lower with liposome bupivacaine 266 mg (n = 92) than with placebo (n = 91; 419 [17] vs. 516 [17]; P < 0.0001). This outcome remained unchanged in a post hoc analysis without score imputation (221 [12] vs. 282 [12]; P = 0.0005). Least-squares mean AUC NRS-R with imputed scores was lower with liposome bupivacaine during each 24-h interval (0 to 24, 24 to 48, and 48 to 72 h) after surgery; AUC NRS-R without imputed scores was lower during the 0- to 24-h and 24- to 48-h intervals. The liposome bupivacaine group had lower mean total opioid use (76 vs. 103 mg morphine; P = 0.0016). Pain was sufficiently severe to require second-step rescue with opioids via intravenously administered patient-controlled analgesia in 92% of liposome bupivacaine patients and 81% of placebo patients. With patient-controlled analgesia and other forms of rescue analgesia, mean NRS scores with activity were moderate in both liposome bupivacaine and placebo groups throughout the part 2 study period. Incidence of adverse events was similar between the groups (part 1: 90 vs. 96%; part 2: 96 vs. 96%, respectively). CONCLUSION: FNB with liposome bupivacaine (266 mg) resulted in modestly lower pain scores and reduced opioid requirements after surgery, with an adverse event profile similar to placebo.

Sufentanil Sublingual Tablet System for the Management of Postoperative Pain after Knee or Hip Arthroplasty: A Randomized, Placebo-controlled Study.

BACKGROUND: Complications with IV patient-controlled analgesia include programming errors, invasive access, and impairment of mobility. This study evaluated an investigational sufentanil sublingual tablet system (SSTS) for the management of pain after knee or hip arthroplasty. METHODS: This prospective, randomized, parallel-arm, double-blind study randomized postoperative patients at 34 U.S. sites to receive SSTS 15 µg (n = 315) or an identical placebo system (n = 104) and pain scores were recorded for up to 72 h. Adult patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists status 1 to 3 after primary total unilateral knee or hip replacement under general anesthesia or with spinal anesthesia that did not include intrathecal opioids were eligible. Patients were excluded if they were opioid tolerant. The primary endpoint was the time-weighted summed pain intensity difference to baseline over 48 h. Secondary endpoints included total pain relief, patient and healthcare professional global assessments, and patient and nurse ease-of-care questionnaires. RESULTS: Summed pain intensity difference (standard error) was higher (better) in the SSTS group compared with placebo (76 [7] vs. -11 [11], difference 88 [95% CI, 66 to 109]; P < 0.001). In the SSTS group, more patients and nurses responded "good" or "excellent" on the global assessments compared with placebo (P < 0.001). Patient and nurse ease-of-care ratings for the system were high in both groups. There was a higher incidence of nausea and pruritus in the SSTS group. CONCLUSION: SSTS could be an effective patient-controlled pain management modality in patients after major orthopedic surgery and is easy to use by both patients and healthcare professionals.

A review of sufentanil and the sufentanil sublingual tablet system for acute moderate to severe pain.

The sufentanil sublingual tablet system (SSTS) is a novel patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) system that is pending approval from the US FDA for the management of moderate to severe acute pain in hospitalized patients. SSTS offers a noninvasive alternative to intravenous (iv.) PCA and optimized on-demand analgesia with the rapid onset and titratibility of sublingual sufentanil. Phase III clinical trials have demonstrated that SSTS has greater efficacy for the treatment of pain during the 72-h postoperative period after open abdominal and major orthopedic (total knee or total hip arthroplasty) surgery compared with iv. PCA with morphine sulfate (MS) or a placebo system. Safety assessments indicate that adverse events are typical for postoperative patients taking opioid analgesics. While the frequency of adverse events is comparable between patients using SSTS and iv. PCA MS, the incidence of oxygen desaturation is lower in those using SSTS.

Fentanyl iontophoretic transdermal system versus morphine intravenous patient-controlled analgesia for pain management following gynecological surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials.

AIM: To compare the efficacy and safety of patient-controlled fentanyl iontophoretic transdermal system (ITS) with morphine intravenous (i.v.) patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) for pain management following gynecological surgery. METHODS: Two-open-label, multicenter, randomized, active-controlled, parallel-group studies (n = 1142) were conducted that compared fentanyl ITS with morphine iv. PCA for postoperative pain. The subgroup of gynecological surgery patients from each trial was utilized for this meta-analysis (n = 604). Of these patients, 295 received fentanyl ITS (40 µg/dose) and 309 received morphine i.v. PCA (1 mg/dose) for up to 72 h. Efficacy measures included the patient global assessment (PGA) and the investigator global assessment (IGA) of the method of pain control. RESULTS: Gynecological surgery patients (n = 604) included in this meta-analysis had a mean age of 45 years, were predominantly Caucasian (65%) and had a mean body mass index of 29 mg/kg2. There were statistically significantly more patients treated with fentanyl ITS and more investigators who rated their pain control method as 'excellent' on the PGA at 24 h (49.3 vs 37.4%, respectively; p = 0.0029) and IGA at the last assessment (59.5 vs. 38.0%, respectively; p < 0.0001), respectively, compared with morphine iv. PCA at the last assessment. CONCLUSION: Following gynecological surgery, patients and investigators were more satisfied (had a higher percent of an 'excellent' rating on the PGA and IGA, respectively) with fentanyl ITS than morphine iv. PCA as a method of pain control.

Sufentanil sublingual tablet system for the management of postoperative pain following open abdominal surgery: a randomized, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of a sufentanil sublingual tablet system (SSTS) for the management of postoperative pain following open abdominal surgery. METHODS: At 13 hospital sites in the United States, patients following surgery with pain intensity of greater than 4 on an 11-point numerical rating scale were randomized to receive SSTS dispensing a 15-µg sufentanil tablet sublingually with a 20-minute lockout or an identical system dispensing a placebo tablet sublingually. Pain intensity scores were recorded at baseline and for up to 72 hours after starting study drug. The primary end point was time-weighted summed pain intensity difference (SPID) over 48 hours. Secondary end points included SPID and total pain relief (TOTPAR) for up to 72 hours and patient and health care provider global assessments of the method of pain control. RESULTS: Summed pain intensity difference over 48 hours was significantly higher in the SSTS group than in the placebo group (least squares mean [SEM], 105.60 [10.14] vs 55.58 [13.11]; P = 0.001). Mean SPID and TOTPAR scores were significantly higher in the SSTS group at all time points from 1 hour (SPID) or 2 hours (TOTPAR) until 72 hours (P < 0.05). In the SSTS group, patient global assessment and health care provider global assessment ratings of good or excellent were greater than placebo at all time points (P < 0.01). Safety parameters, including adverse events and vital signs, were similar for SSTS and placebo. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that SSTS is effective and safe for the management of postoperative pain in patients following open abdominal surgery.

Adverse drug events among patients receiving postsurgical opioids in a large health system: risk factors and outcomes.

PURPOSE: Results of a study of postsurgical opioid-related adverse drug events (ORADEs) within a large health system are reported. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort study, data from the information database of an 11-hospital Texas health system were analyzed to (1) describe postsurgical opioid use among adult patients undergoing elective or emergency surgery over a one-year period, (2) identify ORADE risk factors and associated costs, and (3) compare clinical and economic outcomes in patients who experienced ORADEs and those who did not. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify ORADE risk factors. Propensity score-matched comparisons of outcomes in patients with and without ORADEs were conducted. RESULTS: Among 6,285 patients in the study population, 6,274 (99.8%) received postsurgical opioids; 11.5% of those patients experienced an ORADE. ORADE risk factors included age (≥65 years), male sex, prior opioid use, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cardiac dysrhythmias, regional enteritis, diverticulitis, and ulcerative colitis. Patients with multiple risk factors had higher mean hospitalization costs ($21,073) relative to patients with one risk factor ($14,110) or no risk factor ($11,433) and accounted for a disproportionately large share of overall costs; patients who experienced ORADEs were more likely to be cost and length of stay (LOS) outliers. CONCLUSION: Analysis of information from a large database demonstrated that opioid-treated postsurgical inpatients who had multiple risk factors for ORADEs were more likely to have higher mean costs, greater readmission rates, and longer LOS than patients with fewer risk factors.

Development and validation of a risk score to identify patients at high risk for opioid-related adverse drug events.

BACKGROUND: Opioid-related adverse drug events (ORADEs) are common causes of hospitalization and increased health care costs. OBJECTIVES: To (a) estimate rates of specific adverse drug events (ADEs) among gastrointestinal (GI) surgery patients receiving postoperative opioids; (b) examine the utility of a risk-scoring model in categorizing patients at high risk of experiencing ORADEs; and (c) quantify potential clinical/economic benefits of targeting high-risk GI surgical patients for opioid-sparing regimens in terms of hospitalization cost, length of stay (LOS), and 30-day readmission rates. METHODS: Using a retrospective design based on an administrative database, patients with an inpatient surgical procedure between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2010, were included. GI surgical patients aged greater than 18 years followed from admission through 30 days postdischarge were characterized as high or low risk using clinical/demographic characteristics and were evaluated for several outcomes. Using multivariate logistic regression, the ORADE incidence, total hospitalization cost, LOS, and 30-day readmissions were compared for high-risk and low-risk patients. RESULTS: In 87.8% (n = 3,235) of the surgical population, there was a strong concordance between risk assignment and ORADE incidence. Among the remaining 12.2% (n = 449) of patients, 5.5% (n = 202) were low risk with an ORADE, and 6.7% (n = 247) were high risk without an ORADE. Overall, 20.6% (n = 344) of high-risk patients experienced ≥1 ORADE (mean cost: $31,988; LOS: 12.1 days) compared with only 5.3% (n = 107) of low-risk patients (mean cost: $25,216; LOS: 8.0 days). High-risk patients had higher hospitalization costs and longer LOS than low-risk patients, respectively (mean cost: $19,234 vs. $13,036; mean LOS: 6.8 days vs. 3.3 days). These differences correspond to 47.0% higher costs for high-risk patients and an LOS approximately twice as long compared with low-risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patient clinical/demographic characteristics influence the risk of developing ORADEs. Risk assessment tools can effectively identify high-risk patients, thereby enabling interventions that can reduce ORADEs, decrease hospital costs, and improve postsurgical experiences for patients.

Sufentanil sublingual tablet system vs. intravenous patient-controlled analgesia with morphine for postoperative pain control: a randomized, active-comparator trial.

BACKGROUND: Problems with intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV PCA) are well known, including invasive route of delivery and pump programming errors. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate patient satisfaction with a novel sublingual sufentanil PCA system (sufentanil sublingual tablet system 15 mcg with a 20-minute lockout interval; SSTS) to IV PCA morphine sulfate 1 mg with a 6-minute lockout interval (IV PCA MS) for the management of acute postoperative pain. METHODS: This was a randomized, open-label, 48-hour non-inferiority study with optional extension to 72 hours at 26 U.S. sites enrolling patients scheduled for elective major open abdominal or orthopedic (hip or knee replacement) surgery. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients who responded "good" or "excellent" (collectively "success") at the 48-hour timepoint on the Patient Global Assessment of method of pain control (PGA48). RESULTS: A total of 357 patients received study drug and 78.5% vs. 65.6% of patients achieved PGA48 "success" for SSTS vs. IV PCA MS, respectively, demonstrating non-inferiority (P < 0.001 using the one-side Z-test against the non-inferiority margin) as well as statistical superiority for treatment effect (P = 0.007). Patients using SSTS reported more rapid onset of analgesia and patient and nurse ease of care and satisfaction scores were higher than IV PCA MS. Adverse events were similar between the 2 groups; however, SSTS had fewer patients experiencing oxygen desaturations below 95% compared to IV PCA MS (P = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: Sufentanil sublingual tablet system is a promising new analgesic technology that may address some of the concerns with IV PCA.

Safety of desirudin in thrombosis prevention after total knee arthroplasty: the DESIR-ABLE study.

Desirudin, administered 30 minutes before total hip arthroplasty is superior to enoxaparin in preventing proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) with similar bleeding. The purpose of this study was to determine the safety of desirudin in patients undergoing elective total knee arthroplasty (TKA) when the first dose of desirudin was administered the evening after surgery. This is a case series of patients undergoing TKA who received desirudin 15 mg every 12 hours subcutaneously for an average of 5 days with the first dose administered postoperatively. The primary endpoint was major bleeding; secondary endpoints included wound outcomes (oozing and infection) and new symptomatic DVT or PE. Desirudin has a favorable safety profile when administered postoperatively in patients undergoing TKA with no reports of major bleeding, wound ooze, or infection. No patients experienced symptomatic DVT, but 2 patients had PE detected by computed tomography after experiencing atypical symptoms. The safety profile of desirudin is improved when administered postoperatively. Bleeding and wound outcomes seem to occur less frequently than historical desirudin and enoxaparin controls.

Evaluation of etoricoxib in patients undergoing total knee replacement surgery in a double-blind, randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Optimal postoperative pain management is important to ensure patient comfort and early mobilization. METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled, randomized clinical trial, we evaluated postoperative pain following knee replacement in patients receiving placebo, etoricoxib (90 or 120 mg), or ibuprofen 1800 mg daily for 7 days. Patients ≥18 years of age who had pain at rest ≥5 (0-10 Numerical Rating Scale [NRS]) after unilateral total knee replacement were randomly assigned to placebo (N = 98), etoricoxib 90 mg (N = 224), etoricoxib 120 mg (N = 230), or ibuprofen 1800 mg (N = 224) postoperatively. Co-primary endpoints included Average Pain Intensity Difference at Rest over Days 1-3 (0- to 10-point NRS) and Average Total Daily Dose of Morphine over Days 1-3. Pain upon movement was evaluated using Average Pain Intensity Difference upon Knee Flexion (0- to 10-point NRS). The primary objective was to demonstrate analgesic superiority for the etoricoxib doses vs. placebo; the secondary objective was to demonstrate that the analgesic effect of the etoricoxib doses was non-inferior to ibuprofen. Adverse experiences (AEs) including opioid-related AEs were evaluated. RESULTS: The least squares (LS) mean (95% CI) differences from placebo for Pain Intensity Difference at Rest over Days 1-3 were -0.54 (-0.95, -0.14); -0.49 (-0.89, -0.08); and -0.45 (-0.85, -0.04) for etoricoxib 90 mg, etoricoxib 120 mg, and ibuprofen, respectively (p < 0.05 for etoricoxib vs. placebo). Differences in LS Geometric Mean Ratio morphine use over Days 1-3 from placebo were 0.66 (0.54, 0.82); 0.69 (0.56, 0.85); and 0.66 (0.53, 0.81) for etoricoxib 90 mg, etoricoxib 120 mg, and ibuprofen, respectively (p < 0.001 for etoricoxib vs. placebo). Differences in LS Mean Pain Intensity upon Knee Flexion were -0.37 (-0.85, 0.11); -0.46 (-0.94, 0.01); and -0.42 (-0.90, 0.06) for etoricoxib 90 mg, etoricoxib 120 mg, and ibuprofen, respectively. Opioid-related AEs occurred in 41.8%, 34.7%, 36.5%, and 36.3% of patients on placebo, etoricoxib 90 mg, etoricoxib 120 mg, and ibuprofen, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative use of etoricoxib 90 and 120 mg in patients undergoing total knee replacement is both superior to placebo and non-inferior to ibuprofen in reducing pain at rest and also reduces opioid (morphine) consumption. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00820027.