Liposomal Bupivacaine versus Dexamethasone: Comment

医学 布比卡因 麻醉 随机对照试验 类阿片 地塞米松 回廊的 止痛药 臂丛神经阻滞 臂丛神经 外科 内科学 受体
作者
Vincent Yu,Mary DiGiorgi,Roy Winston
出处
期刊:Anesthesiology [Lippincott Williams & Wilkins]
卷期号:138 (2): 225-227 被引量:3
标识
DOI:10.1097/aln.0000000000004408
摘要

A recently published article in Anesthesiology reported results from a randomized trial that compared the analgesic effectiveness of interscalene brachial plexus block with liposomal bupivacaine to standard bupivacaine with perineural dexamethasone.1 This article by Kim et al.1 concluded that the two study drugs provided similar analgesia with no differences in opioid consumption. However, the article contains a statistical error that led to an incorrect conclusion on the primary outcome measure, and the relationship between pain intensity scores and opioid rescue medication was not fully considered.In this blinded study, 112 adult patients undergoing ambulatory arthroscopic shoulder surgery were randomized to receive an interscalene brachial plexus block with either an admixture of 10 ml (133 mg) liposomal bupivacaine and 5 ml 5% bupivacaine or an admixture of 15 ml 0.5% bupivacaine and 4 mg dexamethasone. The primary outcome was the average numerical rating scale pain scores at rest during 72 h. The primary analysis evaluated whether liposomal bupivacaine was noninferior to bupivacaine with dexamethasone at a margin of 1.3 points.2,3 Additional outcomes included opioid consumption, patient satisfaction, and duration of sensory and motor block at predefined time points up to 7 days postsurgery.The article reported that the mean ± SD numerical rating scale pain score during the first 3 postoperative days was 2.4 ± 1.9 in the liposomal bupivacaine group and 3.4 ± 1.9 in the bupivacaine with dexamethasone group, with a mean difference of −1.1 (95% CI, −1.8 to −0.4; P < 0.0001 for noninferiority). The article concluded that liposomal bupivacaine was not superior to bupivacaine with dexamethasone (one-sided P = 0.998). However, this conclusion and associated P value are incorrect because the upper bound of the 95% CI for the difference between groups excludes 0 in favor of liposomal bupivacaine.4 The P value of 0.998 actually corresponds to a test of superiority (with a null value of 0) for bupivacaine with dexamethasone over liposomal bupivacaine. The correct P value for a one-sided test of superiority of liposomal bupivacaine is 0.002, which is statistically significant. Therefore, the conclusion that the treatments provided similarly effective analgesia is not supported, because liposomal bupivacaine demonstrated both noninferiority and superiority to bupivacaine with dexamethasone. Notably, a treatment demonstrates superiority to a comparator when the CI excludes 0, even when a noninferiority study design is used (fig. 1).5,6The analyses presented in the article by Kim et al.1 did not consider the important relationship between pain intensity scores and rescue medication. Consider, for example, a clinical trial of two analgesics in which patients randomized to receive the less effective analgesic study drug required more opioid rescue medications to achieve satisfactory pain control. The difference between the treatment groups in pain intensity scores over time will be attenuated owing to greater rescue medication use in the group that received the less effective study drug. Therefore, assessments of analgesic effectiveness must consider both pain intensity scores and the amount of rescue medication that supplemented the study drug to achieve those scores.The trial used a stepwise approach to opioid rescue pain medication based on patient-reported pain severity (i.e., tramadol for mild or moderate pain and oxycodone or intravenous hydromorphone for severe pain). Kim et al.1 noted that there were no significant differences in opioid consumption at specific time points (i.e., in the postanesthesia care unit and on postoperative days 1, 2, 3, 4, and 7). However, performing repeated statistical tests for each individual postoperative day reduced the statistical power to detect between-group differences. Furthermore, given the primary objective to evaluate the ability of the study drugs to provide prolonged analgesia during 72 h, it is more appropriate to consider cumulative opioid consumption through 72 h as well. The cumulative postoperative opioid consumption during the first 72 h, the same time window as the primary outcome measure, was 33% lower for patients who received liposomal bupivacaine than for those who received bupivacaine with dexamethasone. Therefore, liposomal bupivacaine achieved a statistically significant reduction in pain intensity scores during the primary study period while, during that same time, fewer opioids were used. It naturally follows that the statistically significant effect on pain intensity scores in favor of liposomal bupivacaine would have been larger than the observed difference of –1.1 if the statistical analysis had accounted for differential use of rescue medication.In conclusion, the randomized controlled trial reported by Kim et al.1 was a well-conducted evaluation of two promising treatment options to provide extended analgesia with an interscalene brachial plexus block. Although postsurgical pain was generally well-controlled with both interventions, the conclusions regarding the key study outcomes were inaccurate. In fact, the trial demonstrated that liposomal bupivacaine provided superior pain control with lower opioid consumption in the postoperative period.An erratum has been published regarding Kim et al.: Anesthesiology 2022; 136:434–47, and a corrected version of the manuscript has been posted online.Dr. DiGiorgi, Dr. Winston, and Dr. Yu are employees of Pacira BioSciences, Inc. (Parsippany-Troy Hills, New Jersey) and may own stock or stock options in the company.
最长约 10秒,即可获得该文献文件

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
更新
PDF的下载单位、IP信息已删除 (2025-6-4)

科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
高挑的冰露完成签到 ,获得积分10
刚刚
ruochenzu发布了新的文献求助10
刚刚
老李完成签到,获得积分10
刚刚
1秒前
2秒前
tough_cookie完成签到 ,获得积分10
3秒前
彩钢房完成签到,获得积分10
4秒前
MeSs完成签到 ,获得积分10
5秒前
toxikon完成签到,获得积分10
6秒前
一点通完成签到,获得积分10
6秒前
Lei完成签到,获得积分10
7秒前
7秒前
7秒前
常若冰完成签到,获得积分10
7秒前
纯真的元风完成签到,获得积分10
8秒前
哇哈哈哈完成签到,获得积分10
8秒前
清秋1001完成签到 ,获得积分10
9秒前
qq完成签到,获得积分10
10秒前
荒野风发布了新的文献求助10
11秒前
Zxx发布了新的文献求助10
12秒前
13秒前
13秒前
确幸完成签到 ,获得积分10
13秒前
苒苒完成签到,获得积分10
13秒前
14秒前
酷波er应助c123采纳,获得10
14秒前
TIAOTIAO完成签到,获得积分10
16秒前
未晚完成签到 ,获得积分10
16秒前
17秒前
17秒前
天天快乐应助qinglinglie采纳,获得10
17秒前
自由老头应助荒野风采纳,获得10
17秒前
本末倒纸发布了新的文献求助10
18秒前
18秒前
甜蜜老虎完成签到,获得积分10
18秒前
脑洞疼应助帅气的蚊子采纳,获得10
19秒前
你好完成签到 ,获得积分10
20秒前
21秒前
21秒前
XZZ完成签到 ,获得积分10
21秒前
高分求助中
【提示信息,请勿应助】关于scihub 10000
Les Mantodea de Guyane: Insecta, Polyneoptera [The Mantids of French Guiana] 3000
徐淮辽南地区新元古代叠层石及生物地层 3000
The Mother of All Tableaux: Order, Equivalence, and Geometry in the Large-scale Structure of Optimality Theory 3000
Global Eyelash Assessment scale (GEA) 1000
Picture Books with Same-sex Parented Families: Unintentional Censorship 550
Research on Disturbance Rejection Control Algorithm for Aerial Operation Robots 500
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 工程类 有机化学 生物化学 物理 内科学 纳米技术 计算机科学 化学工程 复合材料 遗传学 基因 物理化学 催化作用 冶金 细胞生物学 免疫学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 4038619
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 3576294
关于积分的说明 11375058
捐赠科研通 3306084
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 1819374
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 892698
科研通“疑难数据库(出版商)”最低求助积分说明 815066