Transdermal buprenorphine patch versus oral celecoxib for pain management after total knee arthroplasty: An open- label, randomized controlled trial

Is the Use of a Buprenorphine Transdermal Patch More Effective Than Oral Medications for Postoperative Analgesia After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair? A Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Appropriate analgesic protocols for patients following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair remain controversial. Although transdermal buprenorphine patches might potentially provide better pain control and fewer side effects, it is worth noting that there is limited evidence for this given a lack of direct comparisons with oral pain regimens.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

Among patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, and compared with an analgesic approach using oral tramadol plus celecoxib: (1) Does perioperative use of buprenorphine patches provide better pain relief by a clinically important margin? (2) Does perioperative use of buprenorphine patches improve shoulder joint function recovery? (3) Does perioperative use of buprenorphine patches have a lower frequency of adverse reactions?

METHODS

This was a prospective, single-center, randomized controlled trial. We included patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair for partial- or full-thickness rotator cuff tears < 3 cm in size in the anterior to posterior direction as estimated by preoperative MRI and excluded those who had obesity, were pregnant, had opioid dependence, had history of cardiac bypass surgery or ipsilateral rotator cuff repair, had allergies to trial medications, were taking anticoagulants or antidepressants, were being treated with other postsurgical pain management methods, or had severe liver or kidney dysfunction. Based on these criteria, 64% (72 of 112) of patients were eligible. The patients were randomly assigned into either the control group (oral tramadol and celecoxib) or the experimental group (buprenorphine patches). The control group received 100 mg of tramadol and 200 mg of celecoxib every 12 hours for 2 weeks after surgery. The experimental group received buprenorphine patches about 48 hours before surgery without any oral medication. A medication journal was given to the patients to self-report their compliance in taking the drugs. The dosage regimen adhered strictly to protocol. After enrollment, 11% (4 of 36) of patients in the control group and 17% (6 of 36) of patients in the experimental group could not be fully analyzed because of loss to follow-up or missing data. The surveillance period was 3 months, and there was no crossover between groups. The groups did not differ at baseline in terms of demographic parameters and relevant clinical characteristics, including age, gender, BMI, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, tear size, concomitant procedures, and number of anchors. The outcomes were (1) numeric rating scale (NRS) for pain score at rest or with movement, which ranges from 0 to 10, where 0 indicates no pain, and 10 indicates the worst pain; (2) the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score for joint function, which ranges from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better shoulder joint function; and (3) the incidence of postoperative adverse reactions. We defined the minimum clinically important difference on the NRS as 2 of 10 points and on the ASES score as 15 of 100 points, based on anchor-based approaches reported in other studies.

RESULTS

We found no clinically important between-group differences in NRS pain scores at any time point, either at rest or with movement. Likewise, we found no clinically important between-group differences in ASES scores at any time point. Postoperative dizziness or drowsiness (20% [6 of 30 patients] versus 44% [14 of 32 patients]; p = 0.04) and nausea (10% [3 of 30 patients] versus 34% [11 of 32 patients]; p = 0.02) during the hospital stay were slightly lower in the experimental group compared with the control group.

CONCLUSION

In this randomized trial, we found no clinically important advantages in pain or function to the use of buprenorphine patches after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, and insufficient evidence exists to confirm whether the minor differences in transient side effects could justify the use of a new and largely untested analgesic approach in this context. That being so, we recommend against the routine use of buprenorphine patches for this indication. In general, we found that pain levels were low after the procedure in both groups. Future studies, therefore, should focus on the efficacy of buprenorphine patches for more invasive or more painful procedures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, therapeutic study.

Transdermal buprenorphine patch as an adjunct to multimodal analgesia after total joint arthroplasty: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Total hip arthroplasty or total knee arthroplasty (THA/TKA) is often associated with varying degrees of pain. In recent years, transdermal buprenorphine (TDB) patch has shown encouraging results for acute postoperative pain control in orthopedic surgery. The aim of our study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of the combination of TDB patch and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) as a multimodal analgesic regimen after THA/TKA.

Methods

Patients who underwent THA and TKA between January 2022 and January 2023 were reviewed. Three postoperative analgesic regimens were selected: Group A (flurbiprofen 50 mg and tramadol 37.5 mg/acetaminophen 325 mg), Group B (flurbiprofen 50 mg and TDB 5 mg), and Group C (Parecoxib 40 mg and TDB 5 mg). The primary outcomes were the Wong-Baker face pain scale revision (FPS-R) scores and the rate of sleep disturbances. Secondary outcomes of the study included the proportion of patients with postoperative pain relief rates categorized as 0%, <50%, ≥50%, and 100%.

Results

The dynamic FPS-R pain scores on day 3 after surgery in Group B were significantly lower than those in Group A for THA (P < 0.017). The dynamic FPS-R pain scores were lowest in Group C on day 2 and 3 after THA and TKA (P < 0.017). Rate of sleep disturbances was significantly lower in Group B for THA and in Group C for TKA, respectively, compared with that in Group A (P < 0.017). The proportion of dynamic pain relief rate ≥50% in Group C was statistically higher than that in Group A for THA (P < 0.017). Rate of adverse reactions among three groups for THA and TKA was not statistically different (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

This study suggests that the combination of TDB patch and NSAIDs is safe and effective for postoperative analgesia after THA/TKA.

Patient Selection in Randomized Controlled Trials of Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review Assessing Inclusion Criteria

BACKGROUND

Patients undergo total knee arthroplasty (TKA) at widely disparate stages of osteoarthritis, raising the possibility of high heterogeneity among patients enrolled in TKA research studies. Obscuration of treatment effectiveness and other problems that may stem from cohort heterogeneity can be controlled in clinical studies by rigorously defining target patients. The purpose of this review was to determine the extent to which randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on TKA use osteoarthritis severity, as defined by radiographic grade or patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), in their inclusion criteria, and to investigate potential impact on outcome.

METHODS

A search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases used a combination of terms involving TKA, PROMs, and radiographic scoring. A total of 1,227 studies were independently reviewed by 2 screeners for the above terms. RCTs with ≥100 patients (236) and with <100 patients (325) undergoing TKA were analyzed with regard to the specific inclusion criteria and recruitment process.

RESULTS

Among the identified RCTs with ≥100 patients, 18 (<8%, with a total of 2,952 randomized patients) used specific radiographic scoring or PROM thresholds in their inclusion criteria. Eleven of the 18 studies used specific radiographic scoring, such as the Kellgren-Lawrence or Ahlbäck classifications. Three studies used preoperative PROM thresholds: Knee Society Knee Score of <60, Knee Society Function Score of <60, Oxford Knee Score of <20, and Hospital for Special Surgery Score of <60. Among studies with <100 patients, 48 (<15%) used specific inclusion criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

The vast majority of RCTs (>85%) did not enroll patients based on disease severity, as measured by PROM score thresholds or radiographic classifications, in their inclusion criteria. The lack of consistent inclusion criteria likely results in heterogeneous cohorts, potentially undermining the validity of RCTs on TKA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level I . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Celecoxib Decreases the Need for Rescue Analgesics after Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Meta-Analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of celecoxib after total knee arthroplasty. Keywords in the PubMed and Scopus databases were used to find article abstracts. Each included clinical trial was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool, and we extracted data on postoperative pain assessment using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at rest, ambulation, and active range of motion, rescue analgesic intake, and adverse effects. Inverse variance tests with mean differences were used to analyze the numerical variables. The Mantel-Haenszel statistical method and the odds ratio were used to evaluate the dichotomous data. According to this qualitative assessment (n = 482), two studies presented conclusions in favor of celecoxib (n = 187), one showed similar results between celecoxib and the placebo (n = 44), and three clinical trials did not draw conclusions as to the effectiveness of celecoxib versus the placebo (n = 251). Moreover, the evaluation of the rescue analgesic intake showed that the patients receiving celecoxib had a lower intake compared to patients receiving a placebo (n = 278, I2 = 82%, p = 0.006, mean difference = -6.89, 95% IC = -11.76 to -2.02). In conclusion, the pooled analysis shows that administration of celecoxib alone results in a decrease in rescue analgesic consumption compared to a placebo after total knee surgery.

Efficacy and Safety of Transdermal Buprenorphine for Acute Postoperative Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Transdermal buprenorphine (TBUP) may have some advantages for the management of acute postoperative pain. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the efficacy and safety of TBUP compared to other analgesics or placebo for acute postoperative pain. A systematic search was conducted using Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) until December 26, 2022. The search included randomized controlled trials comparing TBUP versus other analgesics or placebo for acute postoperative pain. A certainty assessment was conducted using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) method. The protocol for this review was registered on Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42022318601). In total, 15 studies involving 1,205 participants were included that compared TBUP versus fentanyl (n = 2), celecoxib (n = 3), placebo (n = 2), tramadol (n = 5), diclofenac (n = 3), parecoxib (n = 1), and flurbiprofen (n = 1). Meta-analyses were conducted for 3 comparators that involved 2 studies each. There was no significant difference in pain between TBUP 10 mcg/h versus fentanyl 25 mcg/h (standardized mean difference [SMD] -.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] -.86 to .81, P = .95, I2 = 85%). TBUP 10 mcg/h was associated with less pain compared to celecoxib 200 mg twice daily (SMD -.32, 95% CI -.58 to -.05, P = .02, I2 = 0%) and placebo (SMD -2.29, 95% CI -4.32 to -.27, P = .03, I2 = 94%). The GRADE assessment showed a very low certainty of evidence for all comparisons. There is insufficient evidence that TBUP improves pain control compared to other analgesics for acute postoperative pain. PERSPECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the use of TBUP to other analgesics for postoperative pain. The results showed that there is insufficient evidence to recommend the use of TBUP in this setting. The findings will help clinicians select the most appropriate opioid regimens for postoperative pain.

Buprenorphine for acute post-surgical pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Our study was designed to evaluate the efficacy of buprenorphine for the management of acute post-surgical pain reported in published studies in the years 2015-2022. Comprehensive research was performed by using online resources like PUBMED and the Wiley Library database to gather the relevant literature. Two authors were assigned to independently collect the information. Cochran's Q-test and I square statistic were used to determine the heterogeneity across the studies. Publication bias was estimated by using the Egger regression analysis and found to be significantly present once the P value <0.05. In this review, 15 studies were included. The pooled ratio of pain reduction after 12 hours of surgery was reported as 11.2% with 97% heterogeneity. Day one shows 5.9 reductions in pain with 98% heterogeneity. The 3% more pain was reduced on day 2. The day 3 pooled pain reduction score was observed as 1.9%. The overall pool prevalence of pain reduction was noted as 6.2% at different time duration with significant heterogeneity of 100%. Buprenorphine transdermal and sublingual both have significant pain relief scores. The analgesic drug consumption was reduced at the end of the follow-up duration.

Continuous vs. single-shot adductor canal block for pain management following primary total knee arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Adductor canal block (ACB) provides effective analgesia following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This systematic review aimed to compare continuous and single-shot ACB for pain management and functional recovery following TKA.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and CENTRAL were searched up to January 5th, 2021. Included studies were randomized controlled trials comparing continuous to single-shot ACB for postoperative pain management after primary TKA. Primary outcome was opioid consumption and secondary outcomes were pain intensity, quadriceps strength, mobility, complications, and length of hospital stay. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects method.

RESULTS

Eleven studies (910 patients) were included in this systematic review. Continuous ACB did not significantly decrease opioid consumption (8 studies; 642 patients; MD=-5.67; 95% CI: -13.87 to 2.54; I²=13%) but significantly decreased 48hours pain scores (10 studies; 852 patients; MD=-0,73; 95% CI: -0.93 to -0.54; I²=54%). Continuous ACB improved quadriceps strength (4 studies; 250 patients; SMD=0.59; 95% CI: 0.16 to 1.03; I²=63%) but not Timed Up and Go test performance (5 studies; 524 patients; MD=3.99; 95% CI: -8.98 to 1.01; I²=89%). Type of ACB did not affect nausea and vomiting (5 studies; 357 patients; RR=1.23; 95% CI: 0.65 to 2.34; I²=0%) nor length of hospital stay (8 studies; 655 patients; MD=-0.13; 95% CI: -0.28 to 0.01; I²=36%).

CONCLUSION

Continuous ACB did not reduce opioid consumption following TKA. Larger trials are required.

Recent progress in polymeric non-invasive insulin delivery

The design of carriers for insulin delivery has recently attracted major research attentions in the biomedical field. In general, the release of drug from polymers is driven via a variety of polymers. Several mechanisms such as matrix release, leaching of drug, swelling, and diffusion are usually adopted for the release of drug through polymers. Insulin is one of the most predominant therapeutic drugs for the treatment of both diabetes mellitus; type-I (insulin-dependent) and type II (insulin-independent). Currently, insulin is administered subcutaneously, which makes the patient feel discomfort, pain, hyperinsulinemia, allergic responses, lipodystrophy surrounding the injection area, and occurrence of miscarried glycemic control. Therefore, significant research interest has been focused on designing and developing new insulin delivery technologies to control blood glucose levels and time, which can enhance the patient compliance simultaneously through alternative routes as non-invasive insulin delivery. The aim of this review is to emphasize various non-invasive insulin delivery mechanisms including oral, transdermal, rectal, vaginal, ocular, and nasal. In addition, this review highlights different smart stimuli-responsive insulin delivery systems including glucose, pH, enzymes, near-infrared, ultrasound, magnetic and electric fields, and the application of various polymers as insulin carriers. Finally, the advantages, limitations, and the effect of each non-invasive route on insulin delivery are discussed in detail.

Recent advances in polymeric transdermal drug delivery systems

Transdermal delivery has proven to be one of the most favorable methods among novel drug delivery systems. Since drugs administered by transdermal delivery systems avoid the gastrointestinal tract, and thus avoid conversion by the liver, the likelihood of liver dysfunction and gastrointestinal tract irritation as side effects is low. Drug delivery through the skin has other advantages, such as maintaining an effective rate of drug delivery over time, a steady rate of circulation, and the benefits of a passive delivery system and diffusion. Transdermal drug delivery is achieved using patches which consist of different and specific layers. In the last few decades, many types of patches have been approved worldwide, such as medical plasters, which have been generally applied to the skin for localized diseases. Such patches can be traced back to ancient China (around 2000 BCE) and are the early precursors of today's transdermal patches. With the help of effective design, materials, manufacturing, and evaluation, a large number of drugs can now be administered using this valuable advanced technology. This study reviews different types of polymer patches, their advantages and disadvantages, and different studies related to transdermal drug delivery methods, and the advantages and disadvantages of each method. Different mechanisms of transdermal drug delivery system with patches are also discussed.

Transdermal Buprenorphine for Acute Pain in the Clinical Setting: A Narrative Review

Transdermal buprenorphine is indicated for chronic pain management, but as its role in the clinical management of acute pain is less clear, this narrative review examines studies of the patch for acute pain, mainly in the postoperative setting. Although perhaps better known for its role in opioid rehabilitation programs, buprenorphine is also an effective analgesic that is a Schedule III controlled substance. Although buprenorphine is a partial agonist at the μ-opioid receptor, it is erroneous to think of the agent as a partial analgesic; it has full analgesic efficacy and unique attributes among opioids, such as a ceiling for respiratory depression and low “drug likeability” among those who take opioids for recreational purposes. Transdermal buprenorphine has been most thoroughly studied for acute pain control in postoperative patients. Postoperative pain follows a distinct and predictable trajectory depending on the type of surgery and patient characteristics. Overall, when the patch is applied prior to surgery and left in place for the prescribed seven days, it was associated with reduced postoperative pain, lower consumption of other analgesics, and patient satisfaction. Transdermal buprenorphine has been evaluated in clinical studies of patients undergoing gynecological surgery, hip fracture surgery, knee or hip arthroscopy/arthroplasty, shoulder surgery, and spinal surgery. Transdermal buprenorphine may also be appropriate pain medication for controlling pain during postsurgical orthopedic rehabilitation programs. Transdermal buprenorphine may result in typical opioid-associated side effects but with less frequency than other opioids. Despite clinical reservations about transdermal buprenorphine and its potential role in acute pain management in the clinical setting, clinical acceptance may be hampered by the fact that it is off-label and buprenorphine is better known as an opioid maintenance agent rather than an analgesic.

Perioperative analgesia after intrathecal morphine or local infiltration anesthesia for total knee replacement: A protocol for randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

We perform this protocol for randomized controlled trial to compare the efficacy of intrathecal morphine and local infiltration anesthesia (LIA) in the treatment of the postoperative pain after total knee replacement (TKR).

METHODS

This is a randomized controlled, single center trial which was performed from March 2019 to March 2020. This trial is conducted according to the SPIRIT Checklist of randomized researches. It is authorized via the Ethics Committee of Beijing Friendship Hospital (2019-P2-050-01). Eighty participants who undergo TKR were randomized into 2 groups. Intrathecal morphine group: 0.1 mg of the morphine was intrathecally injected, and the spinal anesthetic was injected at the same time in the group LIA; In the LIA group: the knee joint was infiltrated with epinephrine, ketorologic acid and ropivacaine in the process of operation, and the identical mixture was injected 2 bolus through the intraarticular catheter after operation. The main outcome variables were the visual analog scale and the consumption amount of opioid every 6-hour interval within 2 days postoperatively. The secondary outcome variables were the side effects associated with opioid, the length of hospital stay, motion range, and the loss of blood collected by the closed suction drainage. All the required analyses were carried out via applying the SPSS for Windows Version 19.0.

RESULTS

The clinical outcome variables between groups were shown in .

CONCLUSION

This protocol will provide the evidence on which technique can achieve better analgesia after TKR.