亲爱的研友该休息了!由于当前在线用户较少,发布求助请尽量完整的填写文献信息,科研通机器人24小时在线,伴您度过漫漫科研夜!身体可是革命的本钱,早点休息,好梦!

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 [Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer)]
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.

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
更新
大幅提高文件上传限制,最高150M (2024-4-1)

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
体贴花卷发布了新的文献求助10
2秒前
科研通AI2S应助体贴花卷采纳,获得10
23秒前
37秒前
47秒前
53秒前
zhangchaohui555完成签到,获得积分20
1分钟前
诚心的信封完成签到 ,获得积分10
1分钟前
1分钟前
1分钟前
Yasmine发布了新的文献求助10
1分钟前
科研通AI2S应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
1分钟前
zj完成签到 ,获得积分10
1分钟前
2分钟前
2分钟前
Wilson完成签到 ,获得积分10
2分钟前
xfcy完成签到,获得积分10
2分钟前
AARON完成签到,获得积分10
2分钟前
xfcy发布了新的文献求助10
2分钟前
2分钟前
2分钟前
归tu发布了新的文献求助10
2分钟前
3分钟前
Yasmine完成签到,获得积分10
3分钟前
3分钟前
Dailei完成签到,获得积分10
3分钟前
归tu完成签到,获得积分20
4分钟前
酷波er应助单纯的小甜采纳,获得10
4分钟前
4分钟前
番番完成签到,获得积分10
4分钟前
Aaron发布了新的文献求助10
4分钟前
4分钟前
快乐的如风完成签到,获得积分10
5分钟前
白樱恋曲完成签到 ,获得积分10
5分钟前
5分钟前
5分钟前
subat发布了新的文献求助10
5分钟前
加菲丰丰应助科研通管家采纳,获得20
5分钟前
6分钟前
subat完成签到,获得积分10
6分钟前
7分钟前
高分求助中
Licensing Deals in Pharmaceuticals 2019-2024 3000
Cognitive Paradigms in Knowledge Organisation 2000
Introduction to Spectroscopic Ellipsometry of Thin Film Materials Instrumentation, Data Analysis, and Applications 1800
Natural History of Mantodea 螳螂的自然史 1000
A Photographic Guide to Mantis of China 常见螳螂野外识别手册 800
How Maoism Was Made: Reconstructing China, 1949-1965 800
Barge Mooring (Oilfield Seamanship Series Volume 6) 600
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 医学 生物 材料科学 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 基因 遗传学 催化作用 物理化学 免疫学 量子力学 细胞生物学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 3314391
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 2946633
关于积分的说明 8531170
捐赠科研通 2622376
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 1434483
科研通“疑难数据库(出版商)”最低求助积分说明 665329
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 650881