The effect of ketorolac on posterior thoracolumbar spinal fusions: a prospective double-blinded randomised placebo-controlled trial protocol

Osteoimmunology: Interactions With the Immune System in Spinal Fusion

Spinal fusion is important for the clinical success of patients undergoing surgery, and the immune system plays an increasingly recognized role. Osteoimmunology is the study of the interactions between the immune system and bone. Inflammation impacts the osteogenic, osteoconductive, and osteoinductive properties of bone grafts and substitutes and ultimately influences the success of spinal fusion. Macrophages have emerged as important cells for coordinating the immune response following spinal fusion surgery, and macrophage-derived cytokines impact each phase of bone graft healing. This review explores the cellular and molecular immune processes that regulate bone homeostasis and healing during spinal fusion.

The effect of ketorolac on posterior minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: an interim analysis from a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Postoperative pain control following posterior lumbar fusion continues to be challenging and often requires high doses of opioids for pain relief. The use of ketorolac in spinal fusion is limited due to the risk of pseudarthrosis. However, recent literature suggests it may not affect fusion rates with short-term use and low doses.

PURPOSE

We sought to demonstrate noninferiority regarding fusion rates in patients who received ketorolac after undergoing minimally invasive (MIS) posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Additionally, we sought to demonstrate ketorolac's opioid-sparing effect on analgesia in the immediate postoperative period.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

This is a prospective, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. We are reporting our interim analysis.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Adults with degenerative spinal conditions eligible to undergo a one to three-level MIS transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF).

OUTCOME MEASURES

Six-month and 1-year radiographic fusion as determined by Suk criteria, postoperative opioid consumption as measured by intravenous milligram morphine equivalent, length of stay, and drug-related complications. Self-reported and functional measures include validated visual analog scale, short-form 12, and Oswestry Disability Index.

METHODS

A double-blinded, randomized placebo-controlled, noninferiority trial of patients undergoing 1- to 3-level MIS TLIF was performed with bone morphogenetic protein (BMP). Patients were randomized to receive a 48-hour scheduled treatment of either intravenous ketorolac (15 mg every 6 hours) or saline in addition to a standardized pain regimen. The primary outcome was fusion. Secondary outcomes included 48-hour and total postoperative opioid use demonstrated as milligram morphine equivalence, pain scores, length of stay (LOS), and quality-of-life outcomes. Univariate analyses were performed. The present study provides results from a planned interim analysis.

RESULTS

Two hundred and forty-six patients were analyzed per protocol. Patient characteristics were comparable between the groups. There was no significant difference in 1-year fusion rates between the two treatments (p=.53). The difference in proportion of solid fusion between the ketorolac and placebo groups did not reach inferiority (p=.072, 95% confidence interval, -.07 to .21). There was a significant reduction in total/48-hour mean opioid consumption (p<.001) and LOS (p=.001) for the ketorolac group while demonstrating equivalent mean pain scores in 48 hours postoperative (p=.20). There was no significant difference in rates of perioperative complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Short-term use of low-dose ketorolac in patients who have undergone MIS TLIF with BMP demonstrated noninferior fusion rates. Ketorolac safely demonstrated a significant reduction in postoperative opioid use and LOS while maintaining equivalent postoperative pain control.

Single-dose intravenous ketorolac for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pain is common and may be severe. Postoperative administration of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) reduces patient opioid requirements and, in turn, may reduce the incidence and severity of opioid-induced adverse events (AEs).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of single-dose intravenous ketorolac, compared with placebo or an active comparator, for moderate to severe postoperative pain in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases without language restrictions: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and LILACS on 20 April 2020. We checked clinical trials registers and reference lists of retrieved articles for additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized double-blind trials that compared a single postoperative dose of intravenous ketorolac with placebo or another active treatment, for treating acute postoperative pain in adults following any surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.  Our primary outcome was the number of participants in each arm achieving at least 50% pain relief over a four- and six-hour period. Our secondary outcomes were time to and number of participants using rescue medication; withdrawals due to lack of efficacy, adverse events (AEs), and for any other cause; and number of participants experiencing any AE, serious AEs (SAEs), and NSAID-related or opioid-related AEs. For subgroup analysis, we planned to analyze different doses of parenteral ketorolac separately and to analyze results based on the type of surgery performed. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 12 studies, involving 1905 participants undergoing various surgeries (pelvic/abdominal, dental, and orthopedic), with 17 to 83 participants receiving intravenous ketorolac in each study. Mean study population ages ranged from 22.5 years to 67.4 years. Most studies administered a dose of ketorolac of 30 mg; one study assessed 15 mg, and another administered 60 mg. Most studies had an unclear risk of bias for some domains, particularly allocation concealment and blinding, and a high risk of bias due to small sample size. The overall certainty of evidence for each outcome ranged from very low to moderate. Reasons for downgrading certainty included serious study limitations, inconsistency and imprecision. Ketorolac versus placebo Very low-certainty evidence from eight studies (658 participants) suggests that ketorolac results in a large increase in the number of participants achieving at least 50% pain relief over four hours compared to placebo, but the evidence is very uncertain (risk ratio (RR) 2.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.80 to 4.37). The number needed to treat for one additional participant to benefit (NNTB) was 2.4 (95% CI 1.8 to 3.7). Low-certainty evidence from 10 studies (914 participants) demonstrates that ketorolac may result in a large increase in the number of participants achieving at least 50% pain relief over six hours compared to placebo (RR 3.26, 95% CI 1.93 to 5.51). The NNTB was 2.5 (95% CI 1.9 to 3.7). Among secondary outcomes, for time to rescue medication, moderate-certainty evidence comparing intravenous ketorolac versus placebo demonstrated a mean median of 271 minutes for ketorolac versus 104 minutes for placebo (6 studies, 633 participants). For the number of participants using rescue medication, very low-certainty evidence from five studies (417 participants) compared ketorolac with placebo. The RR was 0.60 (95% CI 0.36 to 1.00), that is, it did not demonstrate a difference between groups. Ketorolac probably results in a slight increase in total adverse event rates compared with placebo (74% versus 65%; 8 studies, 810 participants; RR 1.09, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.19; number needed to treat for an additional harmful event (NNTH) 16.7, 95% CI 8.3 to infinite, moderate-certainty evidence). Serious AEs were rare. Low-certainty evidence from eight studies (703 participants) did not demonstrate a difference in rates between ketorolac and placebo (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.13 to 3.03). Ketorolac versus NSAIDs  Ketorolac was compared to parecoxib in four studies and diclofenac in two studies. For our primary outcome, over both four and six hours there was no evidence of a difference between intravenous ketorolac and another NSAID (low-certainty and moderate-certainty evidence, respectively). Over four hours, four studies (337 participants) produced an RR of 1.04 (95% CI 0.89 to 1.21) and over six hours, six studies (603 participants) produced an RR of 1.06 (95% CI 0.95 to 1.19). For time to rescue medication, low-certainty evidence from four studies (427 participants) suggested that participants receiving ketorolac waited an extra 35 minutes (mean median 331 minutes versus 296 minutes). For the number of participants using rescue medication, very low-certainty evidence from three studies (260 participants) compared ketorolac with another NSAID. The RR was 0.90 (95% CI 0.58 to 1.40), that is, there may be little or no difference between groups.   Ketorolac probably results in a slight increase in total adverse event rates compared with another NSAID (76% versus 68%, 5 studies, 516 participants; RR 1.11, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.23; NNTH 12.5, 95% CI 6.7 to infinite, moderate-certainty evidence). Serious AEs were rare. Low-certainty evidence from five studies (530 participants) did not demonstrate a difference in rates between ketorolac and another NSAID (RR 3.18, 95% CI 0.13 to 76.99). Only one of the five studies reported a single serious AE.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The amount and certainty of evidence for the use of intravenous ketorolac as a treatment for postoperative pain varies across efficacy and safety outcomes and amongst comparators, from very low to moderate. The available evidence indicates that postoperative intravenous ketorolac administration may offer substantial pain relief for most patients, but further research may impact this estimate. Adverse events appear to occur at a slightly higher rate in comparison to placebo and to other NSAIDs. Insufficient information is available to assess whether intravenous ketorolac has a different rate of gastrointestinal or surgical-site bleeding, renal dysfunction, or cardiovascular events versus other NSAIDs. There was a lack of studies in cardiovascular surgeries and in elderly populations who may be at increased risk for adverse events.