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

Timothy I Melson, David L Boyer, Harold S Minkowitz, Alparslan Turan, Yu-Kun Chiang, Mark A Evashenk, Pamela P Palmer, Timothy I Melson, David L Boyer, Harold S Minkowitz, Alparslan Turan, Yu-Kun Chiang, Mark A Evashenk, Pamela P Palmer

Abstract

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.

Keywords: adverse events; onset of analgesia; opioid; oxygen desaturation; patient-controlled analgesia; postoperative pain; sublingual; sublingual tablet system; sufentanil.

© 2014 AcelRx Pharmaceuticals Pain Practice published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of World Institute of Pain.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Sufentanil sublingual tablet system with radio-frequency identification (RFID) patient thumb tag and security tether attached to the bottom of the controller.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Patient disposition flow diagram.
Figure 3
Figure 3
The pain intensity difference to baseline (PID) over the first 8 hours; * P < 0.01.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Kaplan–Meier cumulative event rates for time to termination from the study due to inadequate analgesia (log-rank test P = 0.551)
Figure 5
Figure 5
Percent of patients with oxygen desaturation events; *P = 0.028.

References

    1. Ballantyne JC, Carr DB, Chalmers TC, Dear KBG, Angelillo IF, Mosteller F. Postoperative patient-controlled analgesia: meta-analyses of initial randomized control trials. J Clin Anesth. 1993;5:182–193.
    1. Hudcova J, McNicol E, Quah C, Lau J, Carr DB. Patient-controlled opioid analgesia versus conventional opioid analgesia for postoperative pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;4:CD003348.
    1. Webster J, Osborne S, Rickard C, Hall J. Clinically-indicated replacement versus routine replacement of peripheral venous catheters. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;3:CD007798.
    1. Panchal SJ, Damaraju CV, Nelson WW, Hewitt DJ, Schein JR. System-related events and analgesic gaps during postoperative pain management with the fentanyl iontophoretic transdermal system and morphine intravenous patient-controlled analgesia. Anesth Analg. 2007;105:1437–1441.
    1. Meissner B, Nelson W, Hicks R, Sikirica V, Gagne J, Schein J. The rate and costs attributable to intravenous patient-controlled analgesia errors. Hosp Pharm. 2009;44:312–324.
    1. Lotsch J. Pharmacokinetic–pharmacodynamic modeling of opioids. J Pain Symp Manag. 2005;29:S90–S103.
    1. Mather LE. Opioids: a pharmacologist's delight! Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol. 1995;22:833–836.
    1. Scott JC, Cooke JE, Stanski DR. Electroencephalographic quantitation of opioid effect: comparative pharmacodynamics of fentanyl and sufentanil. Anesthesiology. 1991;74:34–42.
    1. Lotsch J, Skarke C, Schmidt H, Grosch S, Geisslinger G. The transfer half-life of morphine-6-glucuronide from plasma to effect site assessed by pupil size measurement in healthy volunteers. Anesthesiology. 2001;95:1329–1338.
    1. Minkowitz HS, Singla NK, Evashenk MA, et al. Pharmacokinetics of sublingual sufentanil tablets and efficacy and safety in the management of postoperative pain. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2013;38:131–139.
    1. Harding G, Vallow S, Leidy NK, et al. Ease of care with patient controlled analgesia systems: questionnaire development and validation. J Adv Nurs. 2007;59:530–541.
    1. Harding G, Schein JR, Nelson WW, et al. Development and validation of a new instrument to evaluate the ease of use of patient-controlled analgesic modalities for postoperative patients. J Med Econ. 2010;13:42–54.
    1. Sessler CN, Gosnell M, Grap MJ, et al. The Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale: validity and reliability in adult intensive care patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2002;166:1338–1344.
    1. Ely EW, Truman B, Shintani A, et al. Monitoring sedation status over time in ICU patients: the reliability and validity of the Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) JAMA. 2003;289:2983–2991.
    1. Bijur PE, Latimer CT, Gallagher EJ. Validation of a verbally administered numerical rating scale of acute pain for use in the emergency department. Acad Emerg Med. 2003;10:390–392.
    1. Shafer SL, Flood P. The Pharmacology of Opioids. In: Silverstein JH, Rooke GE, Reves JG, McLeskey CH, editors. Geriatric Anesthesiology. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Springer Verlag; 2008. pp. 209–228.
    1. Ibrahim SA. Racial variations in the utilization of knee and hip joint replacement: an introduction and review of the most recent literature. Curr Orthop Pract. 2010;21:126–131.
    1. Ravi B, Croxford R, Reichmann WM, et al. The changing demographics of total joint arthroplasty recipients in the United States and Ontario from 2001 to 2007. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2012;26:637–647.

Source: PubMed

3
購読する