Evaluation of the analgesic efficacy of grapiprant compared with robenacoxib in cats undergoing elective ovariohysterectomy in a prospective, randomized, masked, non-inferiority clinical trial.

IF 1.9 2区 农林科学 Q2 VETERINARY SCIENCES Journal of Feline Medicine and Surgery Pub Date : 2024-03-01 DOI:10.1177/1098612X241230941
Elizabeth K Pisack, Stephanie A Kleine, Chiara E Hampton, Christopher K Smith, Jennifer Weisent, Rebecca DeBolt, Cambrie Schumacher, Genevieve Bussières, Reza Seddighi
{"title":"Evaluation of the analgesic efficacy of grapiprant compared with robenacoxib in cats undergoing elective ovariohysterectomy in a prospective, randomized, masked, non-inferiority clinical trial.","authors":"Elizabeth K Pisack, Stephanie A Kleine, Chiara E Hampton, Christopher K Smith, Jennifer Weisent, Rebecca DeBolt, Cambrie Schumacher, Genevieve Bussières, Reza Seddighi","doi":"10.1177/1098612X241230941","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The main objective of this study was to compare the postoperative analgesic effects of grapiprant with those of robenacoxib in cats undergoing ovariohysterectomy (OVH).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In total, 37 female cats (age range 4 months-10 years, weighing ⩾2.5 kg) were enrolled in a prospective, randomized, masked, non-inferiority (NI) clinical trial. Cats received oral robenacoxib (1 mg/kg) or grapiprant (2 mg/kg) 2 h before OVH. Analgesia was assessed via the Feline Grimace Scale (FGS), the Glasgow Composite Measure Pain Scale-Feline (CMPS-F), von Frey monofilaments (vFFs) and pressure algometry (ALG) 2 h before treatment administration, at extubation, and 2, 4, 6, 8, 18 and 24 hours after extubation. Hydromorphone (<8 h postoperatively) or buprenorphine (>18 h postoperatively) were administered to cats with scores of ⩾5/20 on CMPS-F and/or ⩾4/10 on FGS. NI margins for CMPS-F and vFFs were set at 3 and -0.2, respectively. A mixed-effect ANOVA was used for FGS scores (<i>P</i> <0.05). Data are reported as mean ± SEM.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The data from 33 cats were analyzed. The upper limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.35) was less than the NI margin of 3 for CMPS-F, and the lower limit of the 95% CI (0.055) was greater than the NI margin of -0.2 for vFFs, indicating NI of grapiprant. The FGS scores were greater than baseline at extubation for both treatments (1.65 ± 0.63; <i>P</i> = 0.001); however, there was no difference between treatments. There was no difference between treatments, nor treatment by time interaction, for vFFs (<i>P</i> <0.001). The CMPS-F scores for both treatments were higher at extubation but returned to baseline after 4 h (<i>P</i> <0.001). For ALG, there was no difference in treatment or treatment by time interaction. The robenacoxib group had lower pressure readings at extubation and 6 h compared with baseline.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>These results indicate that grapiprant was non-inferior to robenacoxib for mitigating postsurgical pain in cats after OVH performed via ventral celiotomy. The impact of grapiprant for analgesia in OVH via the flank is unknown.</p>","PeriodicalId":15851,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Feline Medicine and Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10983605/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Feline Medicine and Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1098612X241230941","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: The main objective of this study was to compare the postoperative analgesic effects of grapiprant with those of robenacoxib in cats undergoing ovariohysterectomy (OVH).

Methods: In total, 37 female cats (age range 4 months-10 years, weighing ⩾2.5 kg) were enrolled in a prospective, randomized, masked, non-inferiority (NI) clinical trial. Cats received oral robenacoxib (1 mg/kg) or grapiprant (2 mg/kg) 2 h before OVH. Analgesia was assessed via the Feline Grimace Scale (FGS), the Glasgow Composite Measure Pain Scale-Feline (CMPS-F), von Frey monofilaments (vFFs) and pressure algometry (ALG) 2 h before treatment administration, at extubation, and 2, 4, 6, 8, 18 and 24 hours after extubation. Hydromorphone (<8 h postoperatively) or buprenorphine (>18 h postoperatively) were administered to cats with scores of ⩾5/20 on CMPS-F and/or ⩾4/10 on FGS. NI margins for CMPS-F and vFFs were set at 3 and -0.2, respectively. A mixed-effect ANOVA was used for FGS scores (P <0.05). Data are reported as mean ± SEM.

Results: The data from 33 cats were analyzed. The upper limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.35) was less than the NI margin of 3 for CMPS-F, and the lower limit of the 95% CI (0.055) was greater than the NI margin of -0.2 for vFFs, indicating NI of grapiprant. The FGS scores were greater than baseline at extubation for both treatments (1.65 ± 0.63; P = 0.001); however, there was no difference between treatments. There was no difference between treatments, nor treatment by time interaction, for vFFs (P <0.001). The CMPS-F scores for both treatments were higher at extubation but returned to baseline after 4 h (P <0.001). For ALG, there was no difference in treatment or treatment by time interaction. The robenacoxib group had lower pressure readings at extubation and 6 h compared with baseline.

Conclusions and relevance: These results indicate that grapiprant was non-inferior to robenacoxib for mitigating postsurgical pain in cats after OVH performed via ventral celiotomy. The impact of grapiprant for analgesia in OVH via the flank is unknown.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在一项前瞻性、随机、掩蔽、非劣效性临床试验中,评估格拉吡特与罗苯昔布对接受择期卵巢切除术的猫的镇痛效果。
研究目的本研究的主要目的是比较格拉吡群和罗苯昔布对接受卵巢切除术(OVH)的猫的术后镇痛效果:共有 37 只雌猫(年龄在 4 个月至 10 岁之间,体重 ⩾2.5 公斤)参加了一项前瞻性、随机、蒙面、非劣效性(NI)临床试验。猫咪在OVH前2小时口服罗苯昔布(1毫克/千克)或格拉吡坦(2毫克/千克)。在给药前 2 小时、拔管时以及拔管后 2、4、6、8、18 和 24 小时,通过猫龇牙咧嘴量表 (FGS)、格拉斯哥综合疼痛量表-猫 (CMPS-F)、von Frey 单丝 (vFF) 和压力测谎 (ALG) 评估镇痛效果。对 CMPS-F 评分⩾5/20 和/或 FGS 评分⩾4/10 的猫咪施用氢吗啡酮(术后 18 小时)。CMPS-F 和 vFF 的 NI 边际分别定为 3 和 -0.2。FGS 评分采用混合效应方差分析(P 结果):对 33 只猫的数据进行了分析。CMPS-F 的 95% 置信区间 (CI) 上限(0.35)小于 3 的 NI 差值,而 vFFs 的 95% 置信区间 (CI) 下限(0.055)大于 -0.2 的 NI 差值,这表明粒度渗透因子的 NI 值为 3。两种治疗方法在拔管时的 FGS 评分均高于基线(1.65 ± 0.63;P = 0.001);但治疗方法之间没有差异。在 vFFs(P P 结论和相关性)方面,不同治疗之间没有差异,治疗与时间的交互作用也没有差异:这些结果表明,在通过腹腔腹膜切开术进行 OVH 后,格拉吡群在减轻猫咪手术后疼痛方面的效果不优于罗苯昔布。目前尚不清楚格拉吡群对经腹侧腹腔镜手术的镇痛效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
17.60%
发文量
254
审稿时长
8-16 weeks
期刊介绍: JFMS is an international, peer-reviewed journal aimed at both practitioners and researchers with an interest in the clinical veterinary healthcare of domestic cats. The journal is published monthly in two formats: ‘Classic’ editions containing high-quality original papers on all aspects of feline medicine and surgery, including basic research relevant to clinical practice; and dedicated ‘Clinical Practice’ editions primarily containing opinionated review articles providing state-of-the-art information for feline clinicians, along with other relevant articles such as consensus guidelines.
期刊最新文献
Behaviors suggestive of pain: the perceptions and veterinary-related decisions of cat guardians in the USA. Dietary phosphorus and renal disease in cats: where are we? Retrospective description of the clinical use of chloramphenicol in client-owned cats: 12 cases (2015-2023). Signalment and laboratory findings in cats with diabetes mellitus in Germany: a retrospective review of laboratory submissions of 129,505 cats Tensile testing in feline ventral abdominal coeliotomy closure with different sizes of polydioxanone suture material: a biomechanical study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1