Effects of hydromorphone-based patient-controlled intravenous analgesia on postoperative hypoxaemia: a randomised controlled non-inferiority clinical trial

被引:0
|
作者
Ma, Yumei [1 ]
Feng, Xiangying [2 ]
Yan, Nong [3 ]
Deng, Zhuomin [3 ]
Luo, Jialin [2 ]
Lin, Jingjing [1 ]
Zheng, Ziyu [1 ]
Mu, Xiaoxiao [1 ]
Yang, Xuan [1 ]
Du, Jiejuan [1 ]
Meng, Yang [1 ]
Dong, Hailong [1 ]
Nie, Huang [1 ]
机构
[1] Fourth Mil Med Univ, Xijing Hosp, Dept Anesthesiol & Perioprat Med, Xian, Shaanxi, Peoples R China
[2] Fourth Mil Med Univ, Xijing Hosp, Dept Gen Surg, Xian, Shaanxi, Peoples R China
[3] Mindray Med Int Ltd, Shenzhen, Guangdong, Peoples R China
来源
BMJ OPEN | 2024年 / 14卷 / 07期
关键词
PAIN MANAGEMENT; OPIOID ANALGESIA; ADVERSE EVENTS; INFUSION; MORPHINE; SURGERY; SAFETY; PCA; BUPIVACAINE;
D O I
10.1136/bmjopen-2024-084827
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objective This study aimed to compare the effects of patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) with and without low-basal infusion on postoperative hypoxaemia. Design A randomised parallel-group non-inferiority trial. Setting The trial was conducted at a grade-A tertiary hospital from December 2021 to August 2022. Participants 160 adults undergoing gastrointestinal tumour surgery and receiving postoperative PCIA. Interventions Participants randomly received a low-basal (0.1 mg/hour of hydromorphone) or no-basal infusion PCIA for postoperative 48 hours. Primary and secondary outcome measures Primary outcome was area under curve (AUC) per hour for hypoxaemia, defined as pulse oxygen saturation (SpO(2)) <95%. Secondary outcomes included: AUC per hour at SpO(2)<90% and <85%, hydromorphone consumption, ambulation time and analgesic outcomes up to 48 hours after surgery. Results Among 160 randomised patients, 159 completed the trial. An intention-to- treat analysis showed that AUC per hour (SpO(2)<95%) was greater in the low-basal infusion group compared with the no-basal infusion group, with a median difference of 0.097 ( 95% CI 0.001 to 0.245). Non-inferiority (margin: ratio of means (ROM) of 1.25) was not confirmed since the ROM between the two groups was 2.146 (95% CI 2.138 to 2.155). Hydromorphone consumption was higher in the low-basal group than in the no-basal group (median: 5.2 mg versus 1.6 mg, p<0.001). Meanwhile, there were no differences in the AUC values at the other two hypoxaemia thresholds, in ambulation time, or pain scores between the groups. Conclusions Among the patients receiving hydromorphone PCIA after gastrointestinal tumour resection, low-basal infusion was inferior to no-basal infusion PCIA for postoperative hypoxaemia at SpO(2)<95% up to 48 hours after surgery. Trial registration number ChiCTR2100054317.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Effects of hydromorphone-based intravenous patient-controlled analgesia with and without a low basal infusion on postoperative hypoxaemia: study protocol for a randomised controlled clinical trial
    Ma, Yumei
    Deng, Zhuomin
    Feng, Xiangying
    Luo, Jialin
    Meng, Yang
    Lin, Jingjing
    Mu, Xiaoxiao
    Yang, Xuan
    Nie, Huang
    BMJ OPEN, 2022, 12 (11):
  • [2] Postoperative pain therapy with hydromorphone; comparison of patient-controlled analgesia with target-controlled infusion and standard patient-controlled analgesia A randomised controlled trial
    Wehrfritz, Andreas
    Ihmsen, Harald
    Fuchte, Tobias
    Kim, Michael
    Kremer, Sven
    Weiss, Alexander
    Schuettler, Juergen
    Jeleazcov, Christian
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIOLOGY, 2020, 37 (12) : 1168 - 1175
  • [3] Postoperative intravenous patient-controlled analgesia using hydromorphone and metamizole (dipyrone). A prospective, randomised study
    Lehmann, KA
    Paral, F
    Sabatowski, R
    ANAESTHESIST, 2001, 50 (10): : 750 - 756
  • [4] Controlled Trial of Morphine vs Hydromorphone for Patient-Controlled Analgesia in Children with Postoperative Pain
    Karl, Helen W.
    Tyler, Donald C.
    Miser, Angela W.
    PAIN MEDICINE, 2012, 13 (12) : 1658 - 1659
  • [5] PATIENT-CONTROLLED ANALGESIA - A COMPARISON OF INTRAVENOUS VERSUS SUBCUTANEOUS HYDROMORPHONE
    URQUHART, ML
    KLAPP, K
    WHITE, PF
    ANESTHESIOLOGY, 1988, 69 (03) : 428 - 432
  • [6] The side effects of morphine and hydromorphone patient-controlled analgesia
    Hong, Daewha
    Flood, Pamela
    Diaz, Geraldine
    ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2008, 107 (04): : 1384 - 1389
  • [7] Analgesia and pulmonary function after lung surgery: is a single intercostal nerve block plus patient-controlled intravenous morphine as effective as patient-controlled epidural anaesthesia? A randomized non-inferiority clinical trial
    Meierhenrich, R.
    Hock, D.
    Kuehn, S.
    Baltes, E.
    Muehling, B.
    Muche, R.
    Georgieff, M.
    Gorsewski, G.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2011, 106 (04) : 580 - 589
  • [8] Patient-controlled Analgesia with Target-controlled Infusion of Hydromorphone in Postoperative Pain Therapy
    Jeleazcov, Christian
    Ihmsen, Harald
    Saari, Teijo I.
    Rohde, Doris
    Mell, Jan
    Frohlich, Katharina
    Krajinovic, Ljubica
    Fechner, Jorg
    Schwilden, Helmut
    Schuttler, Jurgen
    ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2016, 124 (01) : 56 - 68
  • [9] Perioperative patient-controlled regional analgesia versus patient-controlled intravenous analgesia for patients with critical limb ischaemia: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
    Chen, Si
    Xu, Zhonghuang
    Liu, Hongju
    Zhang, Yuelun
    Zhang, Jiao
    Chen, Yuexin
    Zheng, Yuehong
    Huang, Yuguang
    BMJ OPEN, 2020, 10 (10):