Intravenous amisulpride as rescue treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing oncologic surgical procedures

12111

Background: Nausea and vomiting or retching after surgery can have significant adverse impacts, including increased length of stay, worse outcomes and patient dissatisfaction. Therefore, effective management remains a high priority. While more aggressive, multimodal prophylaxis has helped, options for treating those patients who fail are limited. Intravenous (IV) amisulpride has been shown to be safe and effective for the rescue treatment of Post-Operative Nausea and Vomiting (PONV) in a large, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in a broad surgical population (Habib AS, Kranke P, Bergese SD, Chung F, et al. Anesthesiology 2019;130:203-212). We conducted a post-hoc analysis to investigate the safety and efficacy of amisulpride specifically in those patients undergoing oncologic surgery, predominantly excision of breast, gastrointestinal, or genitourinary malignancies. Methods: This subset analysis includes data from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter phase III trial of a single 10 mg dose of IV amisulpride as rescue treatment of PONV occurring in patients failing pre/peri-operative prophylaxis, generally with ondansetron and/or dexamethasone (Habib AS, Kranke P, Bergese SD, Chung F, et al. Anesthesiology 2019;130:203-212). The subset includes only those patients identified as undergoing surgery related to a specified malignancy or a mass considered likely to be malignant. The primary efficacy outcome was complete response (CR), defined as no emetic episodes (vomiting or retching) or administration of antiemetic rescue medication in the 24 hours after dosing. Results: In total, 465 patients were treated with either 10 mg amisulpride or placebo and 112 (56 in each group) underwent oncologic surgery. Of these, 43 (38%) underwent surgery for a pelvic tumor, 37 (33%) had breast or axillary surgery, 13 (12%) had colorectal, hepatic or pancreatic surgery and 19 (17%) underwent procedures for other malignancies, such as nephrectomy or thyroidectomy. The CR rate at 24 hours in the amisulpride group was 38%, compared to 23% with placebo. This was comparable with the success rates for the whole study population (42% vs 29%). The CR rate after 2 hours was 66% in the amisulpride group and 39% in the placebo group, also in line with the overall study results (70% vs 49%). Among those patients whose PONV occurred in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU), the mean length of PACU stay from treatment to PACU discharge was 156 minutes in the amisulpride group and 230 minutes in the placebo group. Treatment-emergent adverse effects (TEAE) were comparable in nature and incidence between amisulpride and placebo. Conclusions: Amisulpride at 10 mg IV is safe and effective as rescue treatment for PONV in cancer patients undergoing surgery and is associated with a marked reduction in PACU length of stay.

Opioid-Free Recovery After Hernia Repair with HTX-011 as the Foundation of a Non-Opioid, Multimodal Analgesia Regimen in a Real-World Setting: A Randomized, Open-Label Study

INTRODUCTION

Helping Opioid Prescription Elimination (HOPE) is a project designed to provide surgeons with practical, real-world solutions to effectively manage postoperative pain and eliminate the need for opioids using HTX-011 (extended-release bupivacaine/low-dose meloxicam). In phase 3 herniorrhaphy and bunionectomy studies, HTX-011 without multimodal analgesia (MMA) was superior to bupivacaine hydrochloride in reducing pain and opioid consumption. Here, we examine the HOPE Hernia-1 study, which was designed to compare alternating ibuprofen/acetaminophen with concurrent use as part of an HTX-011-based non-opioid MMA regimen in patients undergoing herniorrhaphy and to evaluate the effectiveness of a personalized opioid prescription algorithm.

METHODS

Patients undergoing outpatient open inguinal herniorrhaphy with intraoperative administration of HTX-011 (300 mg bupivacaine/9 mg meloxicam) were randomly assigned to receive a scheduled oral regimen of ibuprofen plus acetaminophen, either taken together every 6 hours or alternating every 3 hours, for 5 days following surgery, while awake. Based on the opioid prescription algorithm evaluated here, patients could receive an oxycodone prescription upon discharge only if they had a numeric rating scale pain score of ≥ 6 at discharge and/or had received a postoperative rescue opioid.

RESULTS

The majority of patients did not require an opioid prescription through 2 weeks following surgery, and this was similar between cohorts (alternating MMA, 89.1%; concurrent MMA, 93.6%). Patient satisfaction was high for both regimens, and 95% of patients had an opioid-free recovery. No patient discharged without a prescription called back to request one. Treatment was well tolerated, without evidence of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug-related toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

HTX-011, used with over-the-counter products ibuprofen/acetaminophen and personalized opioid prescription algorithm in a real-world environment, has the potential to reduce opioid use and opioid prescriptions after herniorrhaphy without compromising patient satisfaction.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03237481.

Intravenous Tramadol is Effective in the Management of Postoperative Pain Following Abdominoplasty: A Three-Arm Randomized Placebo- and Active-Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Oral tramadol, an atypical opioid approved in the United States (US) since 1995 and a Schedule IV controlled substance, has less abuse liability compared to Schedule II conventional opioids. Intravenous (IV) tramadol is not available in the US, but has the potential to fill a gap between non-opioid medications and conventional opioids for treatment of acute pain. This study evaluates IV tramadol in the management of postoperative pain compared to placebo and standard-of-care active control.

METHODS

A phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, three-arm, randomized, placebo- and active-controlled, multiple-dose, parallel-group study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 50 mg IV tramadol versus placebo and 4 mg IV morphine over 48 h in patients with postoperative pain following abdominoplasty surgery.

RESULTS

IV tramadol was statistically superior (p < 0.05) to placebo and comparable to IV morphine for the primary and all key secondary efficacy outcomes and demonstrated numerically lower rates for the incidence of most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) compared to morphine. No unexpected findings were observed for TEAEs, laboratory tests, vital signs, or electrocardiograms (ECGs). Over 90% of patients completed the study.

CONCLUSION

The study demonstrated that IV tramadol 50 mg is highly effective in the management of postoperative pain following abdominoplasty. The consistency of effects between tramadol and morphine (as compared to placebo) for primary and key secondary endpoints validates the efficacy of tramadol observed. The study also provided direct evidence of improved tolerability of IV tramadol over a standard-of-care conventional Schedule II opioid. IV tramadol may become a useful option in patients where exposure to conventional opioids is not desired.

Efficacy and Safety of Intravenously Administered Tramadol in Patients with Moderate to Severe Pain Following Bunionectomy: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Dose-Finding Study

INTRODUCTION

This study is part of the registrational program for intravenously administered (IV) tramadol in the USA and compared the analgesic benefit and tolerability of two doses of IV tramadol (50 mg and 25 mg) to placebo in adult patients undergoing bunionectomy, an orthopedic surgical model.

METHODS

This was a phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, three-arm, randomized, placebo-controlled, multiple-dose, parallel-group trial to evaluate IV tramadol in the management of postoperative pain following bunionectomy. Eligible patients were randomized (1:1:1 ratio) to IV tramadol 50 mg, 25 mg, or placebo. Primary endpoint was summary of pain intensity differences over 48 h (SPID48). Key secondary endpoints included SPID24, total consumption of rescue analgesia, and patient global assessment of efficacy (PGA). Safety assessments included treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs), clinical laboratory tests, vital signs, and electrocardiograms (ECGs). Assessment of the dose-response was an important objective of the study.

RESULTS

The study established a dose response, with IV tramadol 50 mg demonstrating statistically significant benefit (p < 0.05) over placebo for primary and all key secondary efficacy endpoints, whereas tramadol 25 mg demonstrated intermediate results between the 50 mg and placebo arms. IV tramadol 50 mg was well tolerated; most common TEAEs were nausea and vomiting; and there were no meaningful differences among treatments for vital signs, ECG, and laboratory assessments. The largest proportion of patients completed tramadol 50 mg (98.6%) compared to tramadol 25 mg (91.8%) and placebo (88.2%).

CONCLUSION

IV tramadol 50 mg was effective and well tolerated as treatment for postoperative pain following bunionectomy surgery, while IV tramadol 25 mg, although well tolerated, was judged an ineffective dose for the treatment of pain in this setting. IV tramadol 50 mg was further developed in the registrational program for the USA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03290378.

IV Tramadol - A New Treatment Option for Management of Post-Operative Pain in the US: An Open-Label, Single-Arm, Safety Trial Including Various Types of Surgery

Purpose

There is a need to reduce exposure to Schedule II opioids in the United States (US) due to the ongoing opioid epidemic. Schedule II opioids have higher potential for abuse and misuse than Schedule IV opioids. This Phase 3, multicenter, single-arm, open-label, multiple-dose US trial evaluated the safety and tolerability of intravenous tramadol 50 mg, a Schedule IV opioid, in the management of postoperative pain in a real-world setting, where intravenous tramadol is not yet approved for use.

Patients and Methods

Patients undergoing a range of soft-tissue and orthopedic surgeries were enrolled. Intravenous tramadol 50 mg was given at hours 0, 2, 4, and every 4 h thereafter through up to 7 days of treatment. Non-opioid medications per treating physicians' discretion were allowed if additional pain relief was needed. Endpoints included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), laboratories, vital signs, electrocardiograms (ECGs), and patient global assessment (PGA) of effectiveness.

Results

A total of 251 patients were enrolled, with 4% discontinuing due to TEAE; no patient discontinued due to a lack of efficacy. Patients averaged 13 doses, resulting in average 48 h of exposure. Intravenous tramadol was well tolerated, with TEAEs consistent with known tramadol pharmacology. No unexpected findings were observed, with 95% of patients reporting study medication was good, very good, or excellent for controlling pain.

Conclusion

Outcomes from this real world use study demonstrated intravenous tramadol 50 mg was safe and well tolerated in the management of postoperative pain where intravenous conventional opioids are often used. Intravenous tramadol alone or coadministered with non-opioid medication (when needed) as a multimodal combination analgesia approach resulted in high patient satisfaction with their pain relief. In light of the US opioid epidemic, reducing the exposure to conventional opioids in these patients via use of IV tramadol may be possible.

Correction to: HTX-011 reduced pain intensity and opioid consumption versus bupivacaine HCl in herniorrhaphy: results from the phase 3 EPOCH 2 study

In Abstract, under the section "Results", the first and third p values are incorrect. The correct p values should be p = 0.0004 and p < 0.0001 respectively.

HTX-011 reduced pain intensity and opioid consumption versus bupivacaine HCl in herniorrhaphy: results from the phase 3 EPOCH 2 study

Purpose

Currently available local anesthetics have not demonstrated sufficient analgesia beyond 12–24 h postoperatively. The purpose of the study was to assess the safety and efficacy of HTX-011 (bupivacaine and meloxicam in Biochronomer^® polymer technology), a long-acting investigational anesthetic, in reducing both postoperative pain over 72 h and postoperative opioid use compared to bupivacaine hydrochloride (HCl).

Methods

A phase 3, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled multi-center study (EPOCH 2; NCT03237481) in subjects undergoing unilateral open inguinal herniorrhaphy with mesh placement was performed. Subjects randomly received a single intraoperative dose of HTX-011, immediate-release bupivacaine HCl, or saline placebo prior to closure.

Results

The study evaluated 418 subjects, and the primary and all key secondary efficacy endpoints were in favor of HTX-011. HTX-011 reduced mean pain intensity by 23% versus placebo (primary endpoint; p < 0.001) and by 21% versus bupivacaine HCl (p < 0.001) with significant reductions in the number of patients experiencing severe pain. Opioid consumption over 72 h was reduced by 38% versus placebo (p < 0.001) and 25% versus bupivacaine HCl (p = 0.024). Overall, 51% of HTX-011 subjects were opioid-free through 72 h (versus 22% for placebo [p < 0.001] and 40% for bupivacaine HCl [p = 0.049]). HTX-011 was generally well-tolerated with fewer opioid-related adverse events reported compared to the bupivacaine HCl and placebo and no evidence of local anesthetic systemic toxicity.

Conclusions

HTX-011 demonstrated significant improvement in postoperative pain control and a clinically meaningful reduction in opioid consumption when compared to the most widely used local anesthetic, bupivacaine HCl.

A randomized, double-blind comparison of the NK1 antagonist, aprepitant, versus ondansetron for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting

BACKGROUND

Antiemetics currently in use are not totally effective. Neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists are a new class of antiemetic that have shown promise for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. This is the first study evaluating the efficacy and tolerability of the neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, aprepitant, for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting.

METHODS

In this multicenter, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 805 patients receiving general anesthesia for open abdominal surgery to a preoperative dose of aprepitant 40 mg orally, aprepitant 125 mg orally, or ondansetron 4 mg IV. Vomiting, nausea, and use of rescue therapy were assessed over 48 h after surgery. Treatments were compared using logistic regression.

RESULTS

Incidence rates for the primary end point (complete response [no vomiting and no use of rescue] over 0-24 h after surgery, tested for superiority of aprepitant) were not different across groups (45% with aprepitant 40 mg, 43% with aprepitant 125 mg, and 42% with ondansetron). The incidence of no vomiting (0-24 h) was higher with aprepitant 40 mg (90%) and aprepitant 125 mg (95%) versus ondansetron (74%) (P < 0.001 for both comparisons), although between-treatment use of rescue and nausea control was not different. Both aprepitant doses also had higher incidences of no vomiting over 0-48 h (P < 0.001). No statistically significant differences were seen among the side effect profiles of the treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Aprepitant was superior to ondansetron for prevention of vomiting in the first 24 and 48 h, but no significant differences were observed between aprepitant and ondansetron for nausea control, use of rescue, or complete response.

A randomized, double-blind, dose-ranging, pilot study of intravenous granisetron in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing abdominal hysterectomy 1

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a frequent and unpleasant experience that may increase postoperative complications and costs. For surgical procedures with a high risk of PONV, prevention is preferable to treatment. In this study, the authors explore the dose-response relationship between granisetron administered just prior to the end of surgery and post-operative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing abdominal hysterectomy.

METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, pilot study of post-operative nausea and vomiting prevention. Patients undergoing elective open abdominal hysterectomy requiring general anaesthesia received a single dose of granisetron 0.1, 0.2 or 0.3 mg or placebo administered approximately 15 min prior to the end of surgery. The primary efficacy end-point was the proportion of patients with no vomiting in the 0--6 h interval following medication administration. No inferential statistics were planned.

RESULTS

The proportion of patients with no vomiting episode in the 0--6 h interval after administration of study medication was higher in each granisetron treatment group (>90%) than in the placebo group (77%). Proportions of patients with no vomiting episodes in the 0--24 h interval were similar across treatment groups. Results of analyses of proportions of patients with no moderate or severe nausea episodes, proportions of those requiring rescue medication and times to first use of rescue medication suggested a treatment effect of granisetron relative to placebo in both the 0--6 and 0--24 h intervals. Similar proportions of patients in each treatment group reported at least one adverse event.

CONCLUSIONS

Granisetron at doses of 0.1, 0.2 and 0.3 mg administered just prior to the end of surgery suggested a trend of improved efficacy compared to placebo in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in the first 6 h after abdominal hysterectomy. This pilot study did not identify a dose-response relationship.

The Safety and Efficacy of a Fentanyl Patient-Controlled Transdermal System for Acute Postoperative Analgesia: A Multicenter, Placebo-Controlled Trial

A noninvasive method of delivery of parenteral opioids for management of acute pain may offer logistic advantages for patients and nursing staff. A patient-controlled transdermal system (PCTS) under development consists of a preprogrammed, self-contained drug-delivery system that uses electrotransport technology (E-TRANS, ALZA Corp, Mountain View, CA) to deliver 40 micro g of fentanyl HCl over 10 min per on-demand dose for patient-controlled analgesia (PCA). In this randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial we compared the efficacy and safety of on-demand fentanyl HCl PCTS 40 microg against placebo for postoperative pain up to 24 h after major abdominal, orthopedic, or thoracic surgery in 205 patients. The primary efficacy measurement was the percentage of patients withdrawn from the study because of inadequate analgesia after completing at least 3 h of treatment. Secondary efficacy measures included mean pain intensity (using visual analog scales), patient global assessments, and investigator global assessments. Of 189 patients considered evaluable for efficacy, 25% of patients in the fentanyl HCl PCTS 40 microg group withdrew because of inadequate analgesia, compared with 40.4% of the placebo group (P < 0.05). Use of fentanyl HCl PCTS 40 micro g was associated with lower VAS scores and higher mean patient and investigator global assessment scores compared with placebo. No patient experienced clinically relevant respiratory depression. This study showed that a fentanyl HCl PCTS 40 microg for PCA was superior to placebo and well tolerated for the control of moderate to severe postoperative pain for up to 24 h after major surgery.

IMPLICATIONS

This multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial showed that an on-demand fentanyl HCl patient-controlled transdermal system (PCTS) was superior to placebo and well tolerated for the control of moderate to severe postoperative pain for up to 24 h after major surgery. This fentanyl HCl PCTS is a preprogrammed, needle free, self-contained drug-delivery system that uses electrotransport technology (iontophoresis) to deliver 40 microg of fentanyl per on-demand dose.

Effective Treatment of Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Pain with Intravenous Followed by Oral COX-2 Specific Inhibitor

In this multicenter, double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled study we evaluated the analgesic and opioid-sparing efficacy of a preoperative dose of i.v. parecoxib followed by oral valdecoxib in treating pain associated with elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Patients were randomized to receive a single i.v. dose of parecoxib 40 mg (n = 134) or placebo (n = 129) 30-45 min before induction of anesthesia. Six to 12 h after the i.v. dose, the parecoxib group received a single oral dose of valdecoxib 40 mg, followed by valdecoxib 40 mg qd on postoperative days 1-4, then 40 mg qd prn days 5-7. The placebo i.v. group received oral placebo on an identical schedule. All patients were allowed supplemental i.v. fentanyl as needed during the first 4 h postoperatively (T0-240 min) followed by hydrocodone 5 mg/acetaminophen 500 mg (Vicodin(R); 1-2 tablets orally every 4-6 h as needed). Patients taking parecoxib used 21% less fentanyl than those receiving placebo (P = 0.011). The mean area under the curve of pain intensity (PI) scores over time from T0-240 min was 55.2 for parecoxib and 61.2 for placebo (P = 0.083). At T180 and T240 min, mean PI score was 7.0 and 7.6 points lower in the parecoxib group, respectively (P < 0.02). Fewer patients on valdecoxib required supplemental analgesics (P < 0.05) after discharge. At T240 min and at day 7, Patient's and Physician's/Nurse's Global Evaluations were significantly better in the parecoxib/valdecoxib group (P < 0.05). Incidences of adverse events, adverse events causing withdrawal, and serious adverse events were less for parecoxib/valdecoxib than for placebo. The authors conclude that preoperative parecoxib is a valuable opioid-sparing adjunct to the standard of care for treating pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and subsequent treatment with oral valdecoxib extends this clinical benefit.

IMPLICATIONS

Parecoxib 40 mg i.v., 30-45 min preoperatively followed by oral valdecoxib 40 mg qd reduced opioid requirements and provided superior pain relief as well as improved patient global evaluation after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.