Selective Inhibition of NaV1.8 with VX-548 for Acute Pain.

BACKGROUND: The NaV1.8 voltage-gated sodium channel, expressed in peripheral nociceptive neurons, plays a role in transmitting nociceptive signals. The effect of VX-548, an oral, highly selective inhibitor of NaV1.8, on control of acute pain is being studied. METHODS: After establishing the selectivity of VX-548 for NaV1.8 inhibition in vitro, we conducted two phase 2 trials involving participants with acute pain after abdominoplasty or bunionectomy. In the abdominoplasty trial, participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to receive one of the following over a 48-hour period: a 100-mg oral loading dose of VX-548, followed by a 50-mg maintenance dose every 12 hours (the high-dose group); a 60-mg loading dose of VX-548, followed by a 30-mg maintenance dose every 12 hours (the middle-dose group); hydrocodone bitartrate-acetaminophen (5 mg of hydrocodone bitartrate and 325 mg of acetaminophen every 6 hours); or oral placebo every 6 hours. In the bunionectomy trial, participants were randomly assigned in a 2:2:1:2:2 ratio to receive one of the following over a 48-hour treatment period: oral high-dose VX-548; middle-dose VX-548; low-dose VX-548 (a 20-mg loading dose, followed by a 10-mg maintenance dose every 12 hours); oral hydrocodone bitartrate-acetaminophen (5 mg of hydrocodone bitartrate and 325 mg of acetaminophen every 6 hours); or oral placebo every 6 hours. The primary end point was the time-weighted sum of the pain-intensity difference (SPID) over the 48-hour period (SPID48), a measure derived from the score on the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (range, 0 to 10; higher scores indicate greater pain) at 19 time points after the first dose of VX-548 or placebo. The main analysis compared each dose of VX-548 with placebo. RESULTS: A total of 303 participants were enrolled in the abdominoplasty trial and 274 in the bunionectomy trial. The least-squares mean difference between the high-dose VX-548 and placebo groups in the time-weighted SPID48 was 37.8 (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.2 to 66.4) after abdominoplasty and 36.8 (95% CI, 4.6 to 69.0) after bunionectomy. In both trials, participants who received lower doses of VX-548 had results similar to those with placebo. Headache and constipation were common adverse events with VX-548. CONCLUSIONS: As compared with placebo, VX-548 at the highest dose, but not at lower doses, reduced acute pain over a period of 48 hours after abdominoplasty or bunionectomy. VX-548 was associated with adverse events that were mild to moderate in severity. (Funded by Vertex Pharmaceuticals; VX21-548-101 and VX21-548-102 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT04977336 and NCT05034952.).

Low-dose ketamine safely reduces acute pain in the ED with a more rapid and shorter effect than morphine.

SOURCE CITATION: Guo J, Zhao F, Bian J, et al. Low-dose ketamine versus morphine in the treatment of acute pain in the emergency department: a meta-analysis of 15 randomized controlled trials. Am J Emerg Med. 2024;76:140-149. 38071883.

Opioid analgesia for acute low back pain and neck pain (the OPAL trial): a randomised placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Opioid analgesics are commonly used for acute low back pain and neck pain, but supporting efficacy data are scarce. We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of a judicious short course of an opioid analgesic for acute low back pain and neck pain. METHODS: OPAL was a triple-blinded, placebo-controlled randomised trial that recruited adults (aged ≥18 years) presenting to one of 157 primary care or emergency department sites in Sydney, NSW, Australia, with 12 weeks or less of low back or neck pain (or both) of at least moderate pain severity. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using statistician-generated randomly permuted blocks to guideline-recommended care plus an opioid (oxycodone-naloxone, up to 20 mg oxycodone per day orally) or guideline-recommended care and an identical placebo, for up to 6 weeks. The primary outcome was pain severity at 6 weeks measured with the pain severity subscale of the Brief Pain Inventory (10-point scale), analysed in all eligible participants who provided at least one post-randomisation pain score, by use of a repeated measures linear mixed model. Safety was analysed in all randomly assigned eligible participants. The trial was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12615000775516). FINDINGS: Between Feb 29, 2016, and March 10, 2022, 347 participants were recruited (174 to the opioid group and 173 to the placebo group). 170 (49%) of 346 participants were female and 176 (51%) were male. 33 (19%) of 174 participants in the opioid group and 25 (15%) of 172 in the placebo group had discontinued from the trial by week 6, due to loss to follow-up and participant withdrawals. 151 participants in the opioid group and 159 in the placebo group were included in the primary analysis. Mean pain score at 6 weeks was 2·78 (SE 0·20) in the opioid group versus 2·25 (0·19) in the placebo group (adjusted mean difference 0·53, 95% CI -0·00 to 1·07, p=0·051). 61 (35%) of 174 participants in the opioid group reported at least one adverse event versus 51 (30%) of 172 in the placebo group (p=0·30), but more people in the opioid group reported opioid-related adverse events (eg, 13 [7·5%] of 174 participants in the opioid group reported constipation vs six [3·5%] of 173 in the placebo group). INTERPRETATION: Opioids should not be recommended for acute non-specific low back pain or neck pain given that we found no significant difference in pain severity compared with placebo. This finding calls for a change in the frequent use of opioids for these conditions. FUNDING: National Health and Medical Research Council, University of Sydney Faculty of Medicine and Health, and SafeWork SA.

Benzofuran Iboga-Analogs Modulate Nociception and Inflammation in an Acute Mouse Pain Model.

Pain management following acute injury or post-operative procedures is highly necessary for proper recovery and quality of life. Opioids and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS) have been used for this purpose, but opioids cause addiction and withdrawal symptoms whereas NSAIDS have several systemic toxicities. Derivatives of the naturally occurring iboga alkaloids have previously shown promising behavior in anti-addiction of morphine by virtue of their interaction with opioid receptors. On this frontier, four benzofuran analogs of the iboga family have been synthesized and their analgesic effects have been studied in formalin induced acute pain model in male Swiss albino mice at 30 mg/kg of body weight dose administered intraperitoneally. The antioxidant, anti-inflammatory and neuro-modulatory effects of the analogs were analyzed. Reversal of tail flick latency, restricted locomotion and anxiogenic behavior were observed in iboga alcohol, primary amide and secondary amide. Local neuroinflammatory mediators' substance P, calcitonin gene related peptide, cyclooxygenase-2 and p65 were significantly decreased whereas the depletion of brain derived neurotrophic factor and glia derived neurotrophic factor was overturned on iboga analog treatment. Behavioral patterns after oral administration of the best analog were also analyzed. Taken together, these results show that the iboga family of alkaloid has huge potential in pain management.

Association of Opioid Use Disorder Diagnosis with Management of Acute Low Back Pain: A Medicare Retrospective Cohort Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Practice guidelines recommend nonpharmacologic and nonopioid therapies as first-line pain treatment for acute pain. However, little is known about their utilization generally and among individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) for whom opioid and other pharmacologic therapies carry greater risk of harm. OBJECTIVE: To determine the association between a pre-existing OUD diagnosis and treatment of acute low back pain (aLBP). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using 2016-2019 Medicare data. PARTICIPANTS: Fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries with a new episode of aLBP. MAIN MEASURES: The main independent variable was OUD diagnosis measured prior to the first LBP claim (i.e., index date). Using multivariable logistic regressions, we assessed the following outcomes measured within 30 days of the index date: (1) nonpharmacologic therapies (physical therapy and/or chiropractic care), and (2) prescription opioids. Among opioid recipients, we further assessed opioid dose and co-prescription of gabapentin. Analyses were conducted overall and stratified by receipt of physical therapy, chiropractic care, opioid fills, or gabapentin fills during the 6 months before the index date. KEY RESULTS: We identified 1,263,188 beneficiaries with aLBP, of whom 3.0% had OUD. Two-thirds (65.8%) did not receive pain treatments of interest at baseline. Overall, nonpharmacologic therapy receipt was less prevalent and opioid and nonopioid pharmacologic therapies were more common among beneficiaries with OUD than those without OUD. Beneficiaries with OUD had lower odds of receiving nonpharmacologic therapies (aOR = 0.62, 99%CI = 0.58-0.65) and higher odds of prescription opioid receipt (aOR = 2.24, 99%CI = 2.17-2.32). OUD also was significantly associated with increased odds of opioid doses ≥ 90 morphine milligram equivalents/day (aOR = 2.43, 99%CI = 2.30-2.56) and co-prescription of gabapentin (aOR = 1.15, 99%CI = 1.09-1.22). Similar associations were observed in stratified groups though magnitudes differed. CONCLUSIONS: Medicare beneficiaries with aLBP and OUD underutilized nonpharmacologic pain therapies and commonly received opioids at high doses and with gabapentin. Complementing the promulgation of practice guidelines with implementation science could improve the uptake of evidence-based nonpharmacologic therapies for aLBP.

Intra-accumbal orexinergic system contributes to the stress-induced antinociceptive behaviors in the animal model of acute pain in rats.

Stress and pain are interleaved at numerous levels - influencing each other. Stress can increase the nociception threshold in animals, long-known as stress-induced analgesia (SIA). Orexin is known as a neuropeptide that modulates pain. The effect of stress on the mesolimbic system in the modulation of pain is known. The role of the intra-accumbal orexin receptors in the modulation of acute pain by forced swim stress (FSS) is unclear. In this study, 117 adult male albino Wistar rats (270-300 g) were used. The animals were unilaterally implanted with cannulae above the NAc. The antagonist of the orexin-1 receptor (OX1r), SB334867, and antagonist of the orexin-2 receptor (OX2r), TCS OX2 29, were microinjected into the NAc in different doses (1, 3, 10, and 30 nmol/0.5 µl DMSO) before exposure to FSS for a 6-min period. The tail-flick test was carried out as an assay nociception of acute pain, and the nociceptive threshold [tail-flick latency (TFL)] was measured for 60-minute. The findings demonstrated that exposure to acute stress could remarkably increase the TFLs and antinociceptive responses. Moreover, intra-accumbal microinjection of SB334867 or TCS OX2 29 blocked the antinociceptive effect of stress in the tail-flick test. The contribution of orexin receptors was almost equally modulating SIA. The present study's findings suggest that OX1r and OX2r within the NAc modulate stress-induced antinociceptive responses. The intra-accumbal microinjection of orexin receptors antagonists declares inducing antinociceptive responses by FSS in acute pain. Proposedly, intra-accumbla orexinergic receptors have a role in the development of SIA.

Opioid prescribing requirements to minimize unused medications after an emergency department visit for acute pain: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Unused opioid prescriptions can be a driver of opioid misuse. Our objective was to determine the optimal quantity of opioids to prescribe to patients with acute pain at emergency department discharge, in order to meet their analgesic needs while limiting the amount of unused opioids. METHODS: In a prospective, multicentre cohort study, we included consecutive patients aged 18 years and older with an acute pain condition present for less than 2 weeks who were discharged from emergency department with an opioid prescription. Participants completed a pain medication diary for real-time recording of quantity, doses, and names of all analgesics consumed during a 14-day follow-up period. RESULTS: We included 2240 participants, who had a mean age of 51 years; 48% were female. Over 14 days, participants consumed a median of 5 (quartiles, 1-14) morphine 5 mg tablet equivalents, with significant variation across pain conditions (p < 0.001). Most opioid tablets prescribed (63%) were unused. To meet the opioid need of 80% of patients for 2 weeks, we found that those experiencing renal colic or abdominal pain required fewer opioid tablets (8 morphine 5 mg tablet equivalents) than patients who had fractures (24 tablets), back pain (21 tablets), neck pain (17 tablets), or other musculoskeletal pain (16 tablets). INTERPRETATION: Two-thirds of opioid tablets prescribed at emergency department discharge for acute pain were unused, whereas opioid requirements varied significantly based on the cause of acute pain. Smaller, cause-specific opioid prescriptions could provide adequate pain management while reducing the risk of opioid misuse. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT03953534.

Comparison of Nebulized Ketamine to Intravenous Subdissociative Dose Ketamine for Treating Acute Painful Conditions in the Emergency Department: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy Controlled Trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess and compare the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of intravenous subdissociative-dose ketamine to nebulized ketamine in emergency department (ED) patients with acute painful conditions. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy clinical trial in adult patients (ages 18 and older) with a numerical rating scale pain score of ≥5. We randomized subjects to receive either a single dose of 0.3 mg/kg of intravenous (IV) ketamine or 0.75 mg/kg of nebulized ketamine through a breath-actuated nebulizer. Primary outcome was the difference in pain scores on the numerical rating scale between groups at 30 minutes postmedication administration. The secondary outcomes included the need for rescue analgesia, occurrences of adverse events in each group, and the difference in pain scores at 15, 30, 60, 90, and 120 minutes. We calculated a 95% confidence interval (CI) for a mean difference at 30 minutes, with a minimum clinically important difference set at 1.3 points. RESULTS: We enrolled 150 subjects (75 per group). Mean pain scores through numerical rating scale were 8.2 for both groups at baseline, which decreased to 3.6 and 3.8 at 30 minutes, yielding a mean difference of 0.23 (95% CI -1.32 to 0.857). We observed no clinically concerning changes in vital signs. No serious adverse events occurred in any of the groups throughout the study period. CONCLUSION: We found no difference between the administration of IV and nebulized ketamine for the short-term treatment of moderate to severe acute pain in the ED, with both treatments providing a clinically meaningful reduction in pain scores at 30 minutes.

Topical Diclofenac Versus Oral Ibuprofen Versus Diclofenac + Ibuprofen for Emergency Department Patients With Acute Low Back Pain: A Randomized Study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are useful for a variety of musculoskeletal injuries. It is not known whether topical NSAIDs should be used for patients presenting with acute nonradicular musculoskeletal low back pain. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled double-blind study in which patients 18 to 69 years of age visiting the emergency department (ED) with acute, nontraumatic, nonradicular, musculoskeletal low back pain were randomized at the time of discharge to treatment with 400 mg oral ibuprofen + placebo topical gel, 1% diclofenac topical gel + oral placebo, or 400 mg ibuprofen + 1% diclofenac topical gel. We measured outcomes using the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), a 24-item yes/no instrument about the effect of back pain on a respondent's daily activities. The primary outcome was change in RMDQ score between ED discharge and 2 days later. Medication-related adverse events were elicited by asking whether the study medications caused any new symptoms. RESULTS: In total, 3,281 patients were screened for participation, and 198 were randomized. Overall, 36% of the population were women, the mean age was 40 years (standard deviation, 13), and the median RMDQ score at baseline was 18 (25th to 75th percentile: 13 to 22), indicating substantial low back-related functional impairment. In total, 183 (92%) participants provided primary outcome data. Two days after the ED visit, the ibuprofen + placebo group had improved by 10.1 (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.5 to 12.7), the diclofenac gel + placebo group by 6.4 (95% CI 4.0 to 8.8), and the ibuprofen + diclofenac gel by 8.7 (95% CI 6.3 to 11.1). The between-group differences were as follows: ibuprofen versus diclofenac, 3.7 (95% CI 0.2 to 7.2); ibuprofen versus both medications 1.4 (95% CI -2.1 to 4.9); and diclofenac versus both medications, 2.3 (95% CI -5.7 to 1.0). Medication-related adverse events were reported by 3/60 (5%) ibuprofen patients, 1/63 (2%) diclofenac patients, and 4/64 (6%) patients who received both. CONCLUSION: Among patients with nontraumatic, nonradicular acute musculoskeletal low back pain discharged from an ED, topical diclofenac was probably less efficacious than oral ibuprofen. It demonstrated no additive benefit when coadministered with oral ibuprofen.

Out-of-Hospital Intranasal Ketamine as an Adjunct to Fentanyl for the Treatment of Acute Traumatic Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if out-of-hospital administration of fentanyl and intranasal ketamine, compared to fentanyl alone, improves early pain control after injury. METHODS: We conducted an out-of-hospital randomized, placebo-controlled, blinded, parallel group clinical trial from October 2017 to December 2021. Participants were male, aged 18 to 65 years, receiving fentanyl to treat acute traumatic pain prior to hospital arrival, treated by an urban fire-based emergency medical services agency, and transported to the region's only adult Level I trauma center. Participants randomly received 50 mg intranasal ketamine or placebo. The primary outcome was the proportion with a minimum 2-point reduction in self-described pain on the verbal numerical rating scale 30 minutes after study drug administration assessed by 95% confidence interval overlap. Secondary outcomes were side effects, pain ratings, and additional pain medications through the first 3 hours of care. RESULTS: Among the 192 participants enrolled, 89 (46%) were White, (median age, 36 years; interquartile range, 27 to 53 years), with 103 receiving ketamine and 89 receiving placebo. There was no difference in the proportion experiencing improved pain 30 minutes after treatment (46/103 [44.7%] ketamine versus 32/89 [36.0%] placebo; difference in proportions, 8.7%; 95% confidence interval, -5.1% to 22.5%; P=.22) or at any time point through 3 hours. There was no difference in secondary outcomes or side effects. CONCLUSION: In our sample, we did not detect an analgesic benefit of adding 50 mg intranasal ketamine to fentanyl in out-of-hospital trauma patients.

Noninferiority trials in acute pain research: a valid approach or a slippery slope?

The conduct and reporting of studies with a noninferiority hypothesis is challenging because of the complexity involved in their design and interpretation. However, studies with a noninferiority design have increased in popularity. A recently published trial reported on the noninferiority of lidocaine infusion to epidural analgesia in major abdominal surgeries. Apart from needing a critical appraisal, this draws attention to improve our understanding of noninferiority study framework and its unique features. Given the increasing focus on using various analgesic adjuncts and multiple approaches to fascial plane blocks to avoid more definitive and standard approaches, it is imperative that particular attention is paid to appropriate execution and reporting of noninferiority studies.

The analgesic effectiveness of perioperative lidocaine infusions for acute and chronic persistent postsurgical pain in patients undergoing breast cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women and tumour resection carries a high prevalence of chronic persistent postsurgical pain (CPSP). Perioperative i.v. lidocaine infusion has been proposed as protective against CPSP; however, evidence of its benefits is conflicting. This review evaluates the effectiveness of perioperative lidocaine infusions for breast cancer surgery. METHODS: Randomised trials comparing perioperative lidocaine infusions with parenteral analgesia in breast cancer surgery patients were sought. The two co-primary outcomes were the odds of CPSP at 3 and 6 months after operation. Secondary outcomes included rest pain at 1, 6, 12, and 24 h; analgesic consumption at 0-24 and 25-48 h; quality of recovery; opioid-related side-effects; and lidocaine infusion side-effects. Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman (HKSJ) random effects modelling was used. RESULTS: Thirteen trials (1039 patients; lidocaine: 518, control: 521) were included. Compared with control, perioperative lidocaine infusion did not decrease the odds of developing CPSP at 3 and 6 months. Lidocaine infusion improved postoperative pain at 1 h by a mean difference (95% confidence interval) of -0.65 cm (-0.73 to -0.57 cm) (P<0.0001); however, this difference was not clinically important (1.1 cm threshold). Similarly, lidocaine infusion reduced oral morphine consumption by 7.06 mg (-13.19 to -0.93) (P=0.029) over the first 24 h only; however, this difference was not clinically important (30 mg threshold). The groups were not different for any of the remaining outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Our results provide moderate-quality evidence that perioperative lidocaine infusion does not reduce CPSP in patients undergoing breast cancer surgery. Routine use of lidocaine infusions for perioperative analgesia and CPSP prevention is not supported in this population. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL: PROSPERO CRD42023420888.

The Risk of Kidney Injury in Patients With Sickle Cell Disease Treated With Ketorolac for Acute Pain.

Ketorolac, a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, is used in combination with opioids to manage vaso-occlusive episodes (VOEs). The relationship between ketorolac use and kidney injury in pediatric patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) remains incompletely understood. We hypothesize that ketorolac is associated with acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients with SCD presenting with pain. All nonsurgical hospitalizations for VOEs treated with ketorolac between January 2014 and December 2022 were included. We used optimal matching methodology to identify control admissions (2:1 ratio) and used nonparametric tests to compare ketorolac administration between cases and controls. A total of 1319 encounters/253 patients were included in this study. AKI was noted in 1.1% of encounters and 5.5% of patients. Cases had significantly higher initial BUN than controls (9.0 vs. 6.0 mg/dL, P =0.012). In cases versus controls, there was significantly lower serum sodium (136.0 vs. 138.0 mmol/L, P =0.021). There was no association between ketorolac dose and development of AKI among children with SCD. Higher BUN and lower sodium in cases suggest that patients with AKI were more volume depleted on admission than controls. This highlights the need for strict assessment of fluid status upon admission for VOE.

Opioid analgesic dose and route conversion ratio studies: a scoping review to inform an eDelphi guideline.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians regularly prescribe opioids to manage acute and chronic cancer pain, frequently to address acute postoperative pain, and occasionally to manage chronic non-cancer pain. Clinical efficacy may be suboptimal in some patients due to side effects and/or poor response, and opioid rotation/switching (conversions) is frequently necessary. Despite the widespread practice, opioid conversion ratios are inconsistent between clinicians, practices, and countries. Therefore, we performed a scoping systematic review of opioid conversion studies to inform an international eDelphi guideline. METHODS: To ensure a comprehensive review, we conducted a systematic search across multiple databases (OVID Medline, PsycINFO, Embase, EBM-Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Registered Trials, LILACS, IMEMR, AIM, WPRIM) using studies published up to June 2022. Additionally, we performed hand and Google Scholar searches to verify the completeness of our findings. Our inclusion criteria encompassed randomized and non-randomized studies with no age limit, with only a few pediatric studies identified. We included studies on cancer, non-cancer, acute, and chronic pain. The level and grade of evidence were determined based on the Multinational Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) criteria. RESULTS: Our search yielded 21,118 abstracts, including 140 randomized (RCT) and 68 non-randomized (NRCT) clinical trials. We compared these results with recently published conversion ratios. Modest correlations were noted between published reviews and the present scoping systematic review. CONCLUSION: The present scoping systematic review found low-quality evidence to support an opioid conversion guideline. We will use these data, including conversion ratios and type and route of administration, to inform an eDelphi guideline.

Challenges of acute pain management in older patients.

Adequate management of acute pain in the older population is crucial. However, it is inherently complex because of multiple physiological changes that significantly impact both the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of medications. Current guidelines promote paracetamol as the first-line analgesic for acute pain in older adults, whereas opioids are advised cautiously for moderate to severe acute pain. However, opioids come with a significant array of side effects, which can be more pronounced in older individuals. Ketamine administered via intranasal (IN) and nebulised inhalation in the emergency department for managing acute pain in older patients shows promising potential for improving pain management and reducing opioid reliance Kampan, Thong-on, Sri-on (2024, Age Ageing, 53, afad255). Nebulised ketamine appears superior in terms of adverse event incidence. However, the adoption of IN or nebulised ketamine in older adult acute pain management remains unclear because of the lack of definitive conclusions and clear guidelines. Nevertheless, these modalities can be valuable options for patients where opioid analgesics are contraindicated or when intravenous morphine titration is impractical or contraindicated. Here, we review these concepts, the latest evidence and propose avenues for research.

Dexmedetomidine Prevents Chronic Incisional Pain After Brain Tumor Resection: A Secondary Analysis of the Randomized Control Trial.

BACKGROUND: Dexmedetomidine was reported to reduce postoperative acute pain after neurosurgery. However, the efficacy of dexmedetomidine for preventing chronic incisional pain is uncertain. METHODS: This article is a secondary analysis of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Eligible patients were randomly allocated to either the dexmedetomidine group or the placebo group. Patients assigned to the dexmedetomidine group were given a 0.6 µg kg -1 dexmedetomidine bolus followed by a 0.4 µg kg -1 h -1 maintenance dose until dural closure; placebo patients were given comparable amounts of normal saline. The primary end point was the incidence of incisional pain at 3 months after craniotomy evaluated by numerical rating scale scores and defined as any score >0. The secondary end points were postoperative acute pain scores, sleep quality, and Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ-2) at 3 months after craniotomy. RESULTS: From January 2021 to December 2021, a total of 252 patients were included in the final analysis: the dexmedetomidine group (n = 128) and the placebo group (n = 124). The incidence of chronic incisional pain was 23.4% (30 of 128) in the dexmedetomidine group versus 42.7% (53 of 124) in the placebo group (risk ratio, 0.55; 95% confidence interval, 0.38-0.80; P = .001). The overall severity of chronic incisional pain was mild in both groups. Patients in the dexmedetomidine group had lower acute pain severity on movement than those in the placebo group for the first 3 days after surgery (all adjusted P < .01). Sleep quality did not differ between groups. However, the SF-MPQ-2 total sensory ( P = .01) and neuropathic pain descriptor ( P = .023) scores in the dexmedetomidine group were lower than those in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic intraoperative dexmedetomidine infusion reduces the incidence of chronic incisional pain as well as acute pain score after elective brain tumor resections.

As-needed opioid dosing for emergency patients with a daily use of opioids.

BACKGROUND: Patients with a daily use of opioids have a higher risk of insufficient pain treatment during hospitalization than other patients. This study aimed to examine whether as-needed opioid doses (PRN) were adequately adjusted when patients were admitted to the emergency department (ED) with pain. METHODS: Patients, with a daily use of opioids, who received PRN opioid within the first 3 h after admission at the ED at Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark, were prospectively included from February 2021 to June 2021. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients receiving an inadequate initial dose of PRN opioid, here defined as <15% of daily dose of opioids (DDO) based on sparse evidence, but aligning with the prevailing clinical practice. Secondary outcomes included risk of an inadequate PRN dose in relation to DDO (patients were dichotomized into two groups (DDO <60 or ≥60 mg/day). RESULTS: Among 252 patients admitted to the ED with a daily use of opioids, 149 were admitted with pain and 82 received a PRN opioid dose within 3 h. Twenty-seven out of 82 (33%) patients received a PRN dose of <15% of DDO (95% CI: 23.7-43). When dichotomised; 10 out of 50 (20%) patients with a DDO <60 mg/day (95% CI: 10.0-33.7) versus 17 out of 32 (53.1%) patients with a DDO ≥60 mg/day (95% CI: 34.7-70.9) received an inadequate PRN dose (relative risk, RR: 2.65 [95% CI: 1.4-5.1]). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with daily use of opioids presenting in the ED with acute pain had a high risk of inadequate PRN opioid dose, especially if the DDO was high. Awareness about and education focusing on sufficient PRN doses for patients with a daily use of opioids is (still) called for.

Inhaled analgesics for the treatment of prehospital acute pain-A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Many prehospital emergency patients receive suboptimal treatment for their moderate to severe pain. Various factors may contribute. We aim to systematically review literature pertaining to prehospital emergency adult patients with acute pain and the pain-reducing effects, adverse events (AEs), and safety issues associated with inhaled analgetic agents compared with other prehospital analgesic agents. METHODS: As part of an initiative from the Scandinavian Society of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, we conducted a systematic review (PROSPERO CRD42018114399), applying the PRISMA guidelines, Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE), and Cochrane methods, searching the Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, PubMed, and EMBASE databases (updated March 2024). Inclusion criteria were the use of inhaled analgesic agents in adult patients with acute pain in the prehospital emergency care setting. All steps were performed by minimum of two individual researchers. The primary outcome was pain reduction; secondary outcomes were speed of onset, duration of effect, and relevant AEs. RESULTS: We included seven studies (56,535 patients in total) that compared inhaled agents (methoxyflurane [MF] and nitrous oxide [N2O]) to other drugs or placebo. Study designs were randomized controlled trial (1; n = 60), randomized non-blinded study (1; n = 343), and randomized open-label study (1; n = 270). The remaining were prospective or retrospective observational studies. The evidence according to GRADE was of low or very low quality. No combined meta-analysis was possible. N2O may reduce pain compared to placebo, but not compared to intravenous (IV) paracetamol, and may be less effective compared to morphine and MF. MF may reduce pain compared to paracetamol, ketoprofen, tramadol, and fentanyl. Both agents may be associated with marked but primarily mild AEs. CONCLUSION: We found low-quality evidence suggesting that both MF and N2O are safe and may have a role in the management of pain in the prehospital setting. There is low-quality evidence to support MF as a short-acting single analgesic or as a bridge to IV access and the administration of other analgesics. There may be occupational health issues regarding the prehospital use of N2O.

Cannabinoids for Acute Pain Management: Approaches and Rationale.

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW: Acute pain management remains a challenge and postoperative pain is often undermanaged despite many available treatment options, also including cannabinoids. RECENT FINDINGS: In the light of the opioid epidemic, there has been growing interest in alternative care bundles for pain management, including cannabinoids as potential treatment to decrease opioid prescribing. Despite the lack of solid evidence on the efficacy of cannabinoids, their use among patients with pain, including those using opioids, is currently increasing. This use is supported by data suggesting that cannabinoids could potentially contribute to a better pain management and to a reduction in opioid doses while maintaining effective analgesia with minimum side effects. The scientific basis for supporting the use of cannabis is extensive, although it does not necessarily translate into relevant clinical outcomes. The use of cannabinoids in acute pain did not always consistently show statistically significant results in improving acute pain. Large randomized, controlled trials evaluating diverse cannabis extracts are needed in different clinical pain populations to determine safety and efficacy.

IPACK Block Efficacy for Acute Pain Management after Total Knee Replacement: A Review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Patients often experience a significant degree of knee pain following total knee replacement (TKR). To alleviate this pain, nerve blocks may be performed such as the adductor canal block (ACB). However, ACBs are unable to relieve pain originating from the posterior region of the knee. A new type of nerve block known as the IPACK block may be used in conjunction with ACBs as it is designed to inhibit nerve branches innervating this area. In this article, we examine the rationale behind the IPACK procedure, how it is performed, and clinical trials examining its efficacy. RECENT FINDINGS: 5 of the 7 clinical trials examined in this article showed the IPACK + ACB block to show superior efficacy in treating pain following TKR compared to other blocks. These blocks included PMDI+ACB, SPANK+ACB, PAI+ACB, ACB alone, and SCAB. 2 of the 7 clinical trials showed the IPACK + ACB to be less effective in managing patients pain following TKR compared to other blocks which included the CACB and 4 in 1 block. In most instances, the IPACK + ACB showed superior efficacy in managing patients' pain following TKR when compared to other types of nerve blocks. This was determined by measuring usage of opioids, reported postoperative pain, and length of hospital stays following TKR. Thus, we suppose the IPACK block may be used in conjunction with the ACB to effectively reduce patient's pain following TKR.