1
|
Hamilton TW, Knight R, Stokes JR, Rombach I, Cooper C, Davies L, Dutton SJ, Barker KL, Cook J, Lamb SE, Murray DW, Poulton L, Wang A, Strickland LH, Van Duren BH, Leal J, Beard D, Pandit HG. Efficacy of Liposomal Bupivacaine and Bupivacaine Hydrochloride vs Bupivacaine Hydrochloride Alone as a Periarticular Anesthetic for Patients Undergoing Knee Replacement: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Surg 2022; 157:481-489. [PMID: 35385072 PMCID: PMC8988023 DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2022.0713] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/25/2023]
Abstract
Question Among patients undergoing knee replacement surgery, does liposomal bupivacaine and bupivacaine hydrochloride administered at the surgical site improve postoperative recovery at 72 hours and postoperative pain from 6 to 72 hours compared with bupivacaine hydrochloride alone? Findings In this randomized clinical trial of 533 patients undergoing knee replacement surgery, no difference in the coprimary outcomes of Quality of Recovery 40 score at 72 hours or pain visual analog scale score area under the curve from 6 to 72 hours was detected between patients receiving liposomal bupivacaine and bupivacaine hydrochloride and those receiving bupivacaine hydrochloride alone. In addition, liposomal bupivacaine was not found to be cost-effective. Meaning This study found that liposomal bupivacaine did not improve postoperative recovery or pain compared with bupivacaine hydrochloride alone among patients undergoing knee replacement surgery. Importance More than half of patients who undergo knee replacement surgery report substantial acute postoperative pain. Objective To evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of periarticular liposomal bupivacaine for recovery and pain management after knee replacement. Design, Setting, and Participants This multicenter, patient-blinded, pragmatic, randomized clinical superiority trial involved 533 participants at 11 institutions within the National Health Service in England. Adults undergoing primary unilateral knee replacement for symptomatic end-stage osteoarthritis were enrolled between March 29, 2018, and February 29, 2020, and followed up for 1 year after surgery. Follow-up was completed March 1, 2021. A per-protocol analysis for each coprimary outcome was performed in addition to the main intention-to-treat analysis. Interventions Two hundred sixty-six milligrams of liposomal bupivacaine admixed with 100 mg of bupivacaine hydrochloride compared with 100 mg of bupivacaine hydrochloride alone (control) administered by periarticular injection at the time of surgery. Main Outcome and Measures The coprimary outcomes were Quality of Recovery 40 (QoR-40) score at 72 hours and pain visual analog scale (VAS) score area under the curve (AUC) from 6 to 72 hours. Secondary outcomes included QoR-40 and mean pain VAS at days 0 (evening of surgery), 1, 2, and 3; cumulative opioid consumption for 72 hours; functional outcomes and quality of life at 6 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year; and cost-effectiveness for 1 year. Adverse events and serious adverse events up to 12 months after randomization were also assessed. Results Among the 533 participants included in the analysis, the mean (SD) age was 69.0 (9.7) years; 287 patients were women (53.8%) and 246 were men (46.2%). Baseline characteristics were balanced between study groups. There was no difference between the liposomal bupivacaine and control groups in QoR-40 score at 72 hours (adjusted mean difference, 0.54 [97.5% CI, −2.05 to 3.13]; P = .64) or the pain VAS score AUC at 6 to 72 hours (−21.5 [97.5% CI, −46.8 to 3.8]; P = .06). Analyses of pain VAS and QoR-40 scores demonstrated only 1 statistically significant difference, with the liposomal bupivacaine arm having lower pain scores the evening of surgery (adjusted difference −0.54 [97.5% CI, −1.07 to −0.02]; P = .02). No difference in cumulative opioid consumption and functional outcomes was detected. Liposomal bupivacaine was not cost-effective compared with the control treatment. No difference in adverse or serious adverse events was found between the liposomal bupivacaine and control groups. Conclusions and Relevance This study found no difference in postoperative recovery or pain associated with the use of periarticular liposomal bupivacaine compared with bupivacaine hydrochloride alone in patients who underwent knee replacement surgery. Trial Registration isrctn.com Identifier: ISRCTN54191675
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas W Hamilton
- Oxford Orthopaedic Engineering Centre, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Ruth Knight
- Oxford Clinical Trials Research Unit, Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Jamie R Stokes
- Oxford Clinical Trials Research Unit, Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Ines Rombach
- Health Economics Research Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Cushla Cooper
- Surgical Interventional Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Loretta Davies
- Surgical Interventional Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Susan J Dutton
- Oxford Clinical Trials Research Unit, Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Karen L Barker
- National Institute for Health Research-Biomedical Research Unit, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.,Physiotherapy Research Unit, Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre, Oxford University Hospitals, NHS (National Health Service) Foundation Trust, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Jonathan Cook
- Oxford Clinical Trials Research Unit, Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Sarah E Lamb
- Oxford Clinical Trials Research Unit, Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - David W Murray
- Oxford Orthopaedic Engineering Centre, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Lisa Poulton
- Surgical Interventional Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Ariel Wang
- Oxford Clinical Trials Research Unit, Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Louise H Strickland
- Oxford Orthopaedic Engineering Centre, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Bernard H Van Duren
- Leeds Institute of Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Medicine, Chapel Allerton Hospital, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom
| | - Jose Leal
- Health Economics Research Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - David Beard
- Oxford Clinical Trials Research Unit, Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Hemant G Pandit
- Leeds Institute of Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Medicine, Chapel Allerton Hospital, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Stokes JR, Wang A, Poulton L, Rombach I, Pandit H, Knight R. Study of Peri-Articular Anaesthetic for Replacement of the Knee (SPAARK): statistical analysis plan for a randomised controlled trial assessing the effectiveness of peri-articular liposomal bupivacaine plus bupivacaine hydrochloride compared with bupivacaine hydrochloride alone. Trials 2021; 22:346. [PMID: 34001205 PMCID: PMC8127239 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-021-05293-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/22/2021] [Accepted: 04/23/2021] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Up to three quarters of surgical patients receive inadequate pain relief, with 40% of patients reporting severe pain following knee replacement, which may indicate the current pain relief strategies using opiate-based analgesia cannot achieve patient satisfaction. Liposomal bupivacaine is liposome-encapsulated bupivacaine which has been reported to be effective for up to 72 h. The study of Peri-Articular Anaesthetic for Replacement of the Knee (SPAARK) trial has been designed to assess the effectiveness of peri-articular liposomal bupivacaine and bupivacaine hydrochloride compared with peri-articular bupivacaine hydrochloride alone in the management of post-operative pain following knee replacement. Methods/design The SPAARK trial is a multi-centre, patient-blinded, randomised controlled trial. The co-primary outcomes are post-operative recovery assessed by global QoR-40 scores at 72 h and cumulative pain VAS score from 6 to 72 h following surgery. Longer-term measures of the co-primary outcomes are collected at 6 weeks and 6 and 12 months post randomisation, together with secondary outcomes, i.e. the Oxford Knee Score, and the American Knee Society Score. Cumulative opiate use and fitness for discharge are measured up to 72 h post-surgery. The analysis approaches for the primary and secondary outcomes are described here, as are the descriptive statistics which will be reported. The full SPAARK protocol has already been published. Results The co-primary outcomes will be analysed using multivariate linear regression adjusting for stratification factors and other important prognostic variables, including baseline scores in the case of the QoR-40. The adjusted mean difference between the two groups together with 97.5% confidence intervals will be reported for each of the primary outcomes. Other continuous variables will be assessed using the same method. Binary outcomes will be assessed using chi-squared tests. Discussion The paper provides details of the planned statistical analyses for the SPAARK trial and aims to reduce the risk of outcome reporting bias from prior data knowledge. Any changes or deviations from this statistical analysis plan will be described and justified in the final study report. Trial registration ISRCTN54191675. Registered on 13 November 2017.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jamie R Stokes
- Oxford Clinical Trials Research Unit, Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, Botnar Research Centre, University of Oxford, Windmill Road, Oxford, OX3 7LD, UK
| | - Ariel Wang
- Oxford Clinical Trials Research Unit, Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, Botnar Research Centre, University of Oxford, Windmill Road, Oxford, OX3 7LD, UK.
| | - Lisa Poulton
- Surgical Interventional Trials Unit, Nuffield Department Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Ines Rombach
- Oxford Clinical Trials Research Unit, Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, Botnar Research Centre, University of Oxford, Windmill Road, Oxford, OX3 7LD, UK
| | - Hemant Pandit
- Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences (NDORMS), University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.,Leeds Institute of Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Medicine (LIRMM), University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Ruth Knight
- Oxford Clinical Trials Research Unit, Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, Botnar Research Centre, University of Oxford, Windmill Road, Oxford, OX3 7LD, UK
| |
Collapse
|