Buprenorphine versus full agonist opioids for acute postoperative pain management: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

IF 5.1 2区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine Pub Date : 2025-01-02 DOI:10.1136/rapm-2024-106014
Thomas R Hickey, Gabriel P A Costa, Debora Oliveira, Alexandra Podosek, Audrey Abelleira, Victor Javier Avila-Quintero, Joao P De Aquino
{"title":"Buprenorphine versus full agonist opioids for acute postoperative pain management: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.","authors":"Thomas R Hickey, Gabriel P A Costa, Debora Oliveira, Alexandra Podosek, Audrey Abelleira, Victor Javier Avila-Quintero, Joao P De Aquino","doi":"10.1136/rapm-2024-106014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/importance: </strong>Opioids continue to play a key role in managing acute postoperative pain, but their use contributes to adverse outcomes. Buprenorphine may offer effective analgesia with a superior safety profile.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the efficacy and safety of buprenorphine with other opioids for acute postoperative pain management in adults.</p><p><strong>Evidence review: </strong>MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science were searched from inception to February 2024. Randomized controlled trials comparing buprenorphine with other opioids for acute postoperative pain management in adults were included. Of 2421 records identified, 58 studies met inclusion criteria. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed using Stata/BE V.18. The primary outcome was pain intensity. Secondary outcomes included rescue analgesia use, duration of analgesia, and adverse effects.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Analysis of 41 comparisons (2587 participants) showed buprenorphine significantly reduced pain intensity compared with all other opioids (Hedges's g=-0.36, 95% CI=-0.59 to -0.14, p<0.001, 95% prediction interval (PI)=-1.70 to 0.97). This effect persisted when compared with full agonist opioid (FAO) alone (standardized mean difference -0.34, 95% CI=-0.59 to -0.10, p<0.001, 95% PI=-1.76 to 1.07). Patients receiving buprenorphine were less likely to require rescue analgesia (OR=0.40, 95% CI=0.26 to 0.63, p<0.001, 95% PI=0.12 to 1.36). Mean duration of analgesia was 8.5 hours (SD 1.84). There were no significant differences in other adverse effects including nausea and respiratory depression. Inconsistency was significant for pain intensity (I<sup>2</sup>=86.28%, 95% CI=81.55% to 88.99%) and moderate for rescue analgesia (I<sup>2</sup>=38.93%, 95% CI=1.44% to 64.37%). Risk of bias was low in 19 studies, with some concerns in 37 studies, and high in two studies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Buprenorphine demonstrated superior efficacy in managing acute postoperative pain compared with FAOs, with a favorable safety profile and longer duration of action. These findings support the use of buprenorphine as a first-line opioid analgesic for acute postoperative pain management requiring opioid analgesia, potentially reducing opioid-related harm in the postoperative period.</p><p><strong>Prospero registration number: </strong>CRD42023447715.</p>","PeriodicalId":54503,"journal":{"name":"Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/rapm-2024-106014","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/importance: Opioids continue to play a key role in managing acute postoperative pain, but their use contributes to adverse outcomes. Buprenorphine may offer effective analgesia with a superior safety profile.

Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of buprenorphine with other opioids for acute postoperative pain management in adults.

Evidence review: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science were searched from inception to February 2024. Randomized controlled trials comparing buprenorphine with other opioids for acute postoperative pain management in adults were included. Of 2421 records identified, 58 studies met inclusion criteria. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed using Stata/BE V.18. The primary outcome was pain intensity. Secondary outcomes included rescue analgesia use, duration of analgesia, and adverse effects.

Findings: Analysis of 41 comparisons (2587 participants) showed buprenorphine significantly reduced pain intensity compared with all other opioids (Hedges's g=-0.36, 95% CI=-0.59 to -0.14, p<0.001, 95% prediction interval (PI)=-1.70 to 0.97). This effect persisted when compared with full agonist opioid (FAO) alone (standardized mean difference -0.34, 95% CI=-0.59 to -0.10, p<0.001, 95% PI=-1.76 to 1.07). Patients receiving buprenorphine were less likely to require rescue analgesia (OR=0.40, 95% CI=0.26 to 0.63, p<0.001, 95% PI=0.12 to 1.36). Mean duration of analgesia was 8.5 hours (SD 1.84). There were no significant differences in other adverse effects including nausea and respiratory depression. Inconsistency was significant for pain intensity (I2=86.28%, 95% CI=81.55% to 88.99%) and moderate for rescue analgesia (I2=38.93%, 95% CI=1.44% to 64.37%). Risk of bias was low in 19 studies, with some concerns in 37 studies, and high in two studies.

Conclusions: Buprenorphine demonstrated superior efficacy in managing acute postoperative pain compared with FAOs, with a favorable safety profile and longer duration of action. These findings support the use of buprenorphine as a first-line opioid analgesic for acute postoperative pain management requiring opioid analgesia, potentially reducing opioid-related harm in the postoperative period.

Prospero registration number: CRD42023447715.

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
丁丙诺啡与阿片类药物完全激动剂治疗急性术后疼痛:随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景/重要性:阿片类药物在处理急性术后疼痛方面继续发挥关键作用,但其使用会导致不良后果。丁丙诺啡可能提供有效的镇痛与优越的安全性。目的:比较丁丙诺啡与其他阿片类药物治疗成人术后急性疼痛的疗效和安全性。证据回顾:检索了MEDLINE、Embase、Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials和Web of Science,检索时间从创立到2024年2月。随机对照试验比较丁丙诺啡与其他阿片类药物用于成人急性术后疼痛管理。在确定的2421项记录中,58项研究符合纳入标准。两名审稿人独立提取数据并评估偏倚风险。采用Stata/BE V.18进行随机效应荟萃分析。主要结局是疼痛强度。次要结局包括抢救性镇痛使用、镇痛持续时间和不良反应。结果:41项比较分析(2587名参与者)显示,与所有其他阿片类药物相比,丁丙诺啡显著降低疼痛强度(Hedges's g=-0.36, 95% CI=-0.59至-0.14,p2=86.28%, 95% CI=81.55%至88.99%),中度镇痛(I2=38.93%, 95% CI=1.44%至64.37%)。19项研究的偏倚风险较低,37项研究有偏倚风险,2项研究偏倚风险较高。结论:与FAOs相比,丁丙诺啡在治疗急性术后疼痛方面表现出更好的疗效,具有良好的安全性和更长的作用时间。这些发现支持丁丙诺啡作为一线阿片类镇痛药用于需要阿片类镇痛的急性术后疼痛管理,可能减少术后阿片类相关伤害。普洛斯彼罗注册号:CRD42023447715。
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
8.50
自引率
11.80%
发文量
175
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine, the official publication of the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine (ASRA), is a monthly journal that publishes peer-reviewed scientific and clinical studies to advance the understanding and clinical application of regional techniques for surgical anesthesia and postoperative analgesia. Coverage includes intraoperative regional techniques, perioperative pain, chronic pain, obstetric anesthesia, pediatric anesthesia, outcome studies, and complications. Published for over thirty years, this respected journal also serves as the official publication of the European Society of Regional Anaesthesia and Pain Therapy (ESRA), the Asian and Oceanic Society of Regional Anesthesia (AOSRA), the Latin American Society of Regional Anesthesia (LASRA), the African Society for Regional Anesthesia (AFSRA), and the Academy of Regional Anaesthesia of India (AORA).
期刊最新文献
Cadaveric study of the obturator nerve: frequency of skin innervation and the optimal site for blocking the cutaneous branch. Effect of stellate ganglion block on brain hemodynamics and the inflammatory response in moderate and severe traumatic brain injury: a pilot study. Letter to the editor: Is medetomidine the next perioperative substance of abuse? Perineuromal hydrodissection for acute postamputation pain? An observational study in a time of war. FRONT block: a cadaveric study of a dual-plane injection block targeting femoral rami and obturator nerve trunk for anterior hip joint analgesia.
×
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