10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      Journal of Pain Research (submit here)

      This international, peer-reviewed Open Access journal by Dove Medical Press focuses on reporting of high-quality laboratory and clinical findings in all fields of pain research and the prevention and management of pain. Sign up for email alerts here.

      52,235 Monthly downloads/views I 2.832 Impact Factor I 4.5 CiteScore I 1.2 Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) I 0.655 Scimago Journal & Country Rank (SJR)

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Sublingual Sufentanil versus Standard-of-Care (Patient-Controlled Analgesia with Epidural Ropivacaine/Sufentanil or Intravenous Morphine) for Postoperative Pain Following Pancreatoduodenectomy: A Randomized Trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The optimal treatment strategy for postoperative pain following pancreatoduodenectomy remains unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate whether sublingual sufentanil tablet (SST) is a non-inferior analgesic compared to our standard-of-care (patient-controlled epidural analgesia [PCEA] or PCA morphine) in the treatment of pain following pancreatoduodenectomy.

          Methods

          This was a pragmatic, strategy, open-label, non-inferiority, parallel group, randomized (1:1) trial. The primary outcome was an overall mean pain score (Numerical Rating Scale: 0–10) on postoperative days 1 to 3 combined. The non-inferiority margin was −1.5 since this difference was considered clinically relevant.

          Results

          Between October 2018 and July 2021, 190 patients were assessed for eligibility and 36 patients were included in the final analysis: 17 patients were randomized to SST and 19 patients to standard-of-care. Early treatment failure in the SST group occurred in 2 patients (12%) due to inability to operate the SST system and in 2 patients (12%) due to severe nausea despite antiemetics. Early treatment failure in the standard-of-care group occurred in 2 patients (11%) due to preoperative PCEA placement failure and in 1 patient (5%) due to hemodynamic instability caused by PCEA. The mean difference in pain score on postoperative day 1 to 3 was −0.10 (95% CI −0.72–0.52), and therefore the non-inferiority of SST compared to standard-of-care was demonstrated. The mean pain score, number of patients reporting unacceptable pain (pain score >4), Overall Benefit of Analgesia Score, and patient satisfaction per postoperative day, perioperative hemodynamics and postoperative outcomes did not differ significantly between groups.

          Conclusion

          This first randomized study investigating the use of SST in 36 patients following pancreatoduodenectomy showed that SST is non-inferior compared to our standard-of-care in the treatment of pain on postoperative days 1 to 3. Future research is needed to confirm that these findings are applicable to other settings.

          Most cited references27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey.

          Although quality assessment is gaining increasing attention, there is still no consensus on how to define and grade postoperative complications. This shortcoming hampers comparison of outcome data among different centers and therapies and over time. A classification of complications published by one of the authors in 1992 was critically re-evaluated and modified to increase its accuracy and its acceptability in the surgical community. Modifications mainly focused on the manner of reporting life-threatening and permanently disabling complications. The new grading system still mostly relies on the therapy used to treat the complication. The classification was tested in a cohort of 6336 patients who underwent elective general surgery at our institution. The reproducibility and personal judgment of the classification were evaluated through an international survey with 2 questionnaires sent to 10 surgical centers worldwide. The new ranking system significantly correlated with complexity of surgery (P < 0.0001) as well as with the length of the hospital stay (P < 0.0001). A total of 144 surgeons from 10 different centers around the world and at different levels of training returned the survey. Ninety percent of the case presentations were correctly graded. The classification was considered to be simple (92% of the respondents), reproducible (91%), logical (92%), useful (90%), and comprehensive (89%). The answers of both questionnaires were not dependent on the origin of the reply and the level of training of the surgeons. The new complication classification appears reliable and may represent a compelling tool for quality assessment in surgery in all parts of the world.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Efficacy of continuous wound catheters delivering local anesthetic for postoperative analgesia: a quantitative and qualitative systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              What decline in pain intensity is meaningful to patients with acute pain?

              Despite widespread use of the 0-10 numeric rating scale (NRS) of pain intensity, relatively little is known about the meaning of decreases in pain intensity assessed by means of this scale to patients. We aimed to establish the meaning to patients of declines in pain intensity and percent pain reduction. Upon arrival to the postanesthesia care unit, postsurgical patients rated their baseline pain intensity on both a 0-10 NRS and on a 4-point verbal scale. Patients whose NRS was higher than 4/10 received intravenous opioids until their pain intensity declined to 4/10 or lower. During opioid titration, patients were asked every 10 min to rate pain intensity on a NRS and to indicate the degree of pain improvement on a 5-point Likert scale from 'no improvement' to 'complete pain relief'. Seven hundred adult patients were enrolled. For patients with moderate pain, a decrease of 1.3 units (20% reduction) corresponded to 'minimal' improvement, a decrease of 2.4 (35% reduction) to 'much' improvement, a decrease of 3.5 units (45% reduction) corresponded to 'very much' improvement. For patients with severe pain, the decrease in NRS pain score and the percentage of pain relief had to be larger to obtain similar degrees of pain relief. The change in pain intensity that is meaningful to patients increases as the severity of their baseline pain increases. The present findings are applicable in the clinical setting and research arena to assess treatment efficacy.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Pain Res
                J Pain Res
                jpr
                Journal of Pain Research
                Dove
                1178-7090
                22 June 2022
                2022
                : 15
                : 1775-1786
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center , Leiden, The Netherlands
                [2 ]Department of Anesthesiology, Leiden University Medical Center , Leiden, The Netherlands
                [3 ]Department of Medical Statistics, Leiden University Medical Center , Leiden, The Netherlands
                Author notes
                Correspondence: A Dahan, Department of Anesthesiology, Leiden University Medical Center , Albinusdreef 2, Leiden, 2300 RC, The Netherlands, Tel +31 71 526 2301, Email A.Dahan@lumc.nl
                [*]

                These authors contributed equally to this work

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2438-4665
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0289-6432
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3161-3945
                Article
                363545
                10.2147/JPR.S363545
                9234185
                075886a9-48a6-4459-935e-9deb34412511
                © 2022 Groen et al.

                This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms ( https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).

                History
                : 22 February 2022
                : 17 June 2022
                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 7, References: 28, Pages: 12
                Categories
                Original Research

                Anesthesiology & Pain management
                postoperative pain,pancreatoduodenectomy,sufentanil,epidural analgesia,morphine

                Comments

                Comment on this article