Dataset Information

Efficacy and Safety of Esketamine for Supplemental Analgesia During Elective Cesarean Delivery: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Epidural anesthesia is a primary choice for cesarean delivery, but supplemental analgesics are often required to relieve pain during uterine traction.

Objective

To investigate the sedative and analgesic effects of intravenous esketamine administered before childbirth via cesarean delivery with the patient under epidural anesthesia.

Design, setting, and participants

This multicenter, double-blind randomized clinical trial assessed 903 women 18 years or older who had full-term single pregnancy and were scheduled for elective cesarean delivery with epidural anesthesia in 5 medical centers in China from September 18, 2021, to September 20, 2022.

Intervention

Patients were randomized to receive intravenous injection of 0.25 mg/kg of esketamine or placebo before incision.

Main outcomes and measures

The coprimary outcomes included scores on the numeric rating scale of pain (an 11-point scale, with 0 indicating no pain and 10 indicating the worst pain; a difference of ≥1.65 points was clinically meaningful) and Ramsay Sedation Scale (a 6-point scale, with 1 indicating restlessness and 6 indicating deep sleep without response; a difference of ≥2 points was clinically meaningful) immediately after fetal delivery. Secondary outcomes included neonatal Apgar score assessed at 1 and 5 minutes after birth.

Results

A total of 600 women (mean [SD] age, 30.7 [4.3] years) were enrolled and randomized; all were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Immediately after fetal delivery, the score on the numeric rating scale of pain was lower with esketamine (median [IQR], 0 [0-1]) than with placebo (median [IQR], 0 [0-2]; median difference, 0; 95% CI, 0-0; P = .001), but the difference was not clinically important. The Ramsay Sedation Scale scores were higher (sedation deeper) with esketamine (median [IQR], 4 [3-4]) than with placebo (median [IQR], 2 [2-2]; median difference, 2; 95% CI, 2-2; P < .001). The neonatal Apgar scores did not differ between the 2 groups at 1 minute (median difference, 0; 95% CI, 0-0; P = .98) and at 5 minutes (median difference, 0; 95% CI, 0-0; P = .27). Transient neurologic or mental symptoms were more common in patients given esketamine (97.7% [293 of 300]) than in those given placebo (4.7% [14 of 300]; P < .001).

Conclusions and relevance

For women undergoing cesarean delivery under epidural anesthesia, a subanesthetic dose of esketamine administered before incision produced transient analgesia and sedation but did not induce significant neonatal depression. Mental symptoms and nystagmus were common but transient. Indications and the optimal dose of esketamine in this patient population need further clarification, but study should be limited to those who require supplemental analgesia.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04548973.

SUBMITTER: Xu LL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10122167 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficacy and Safety of Esketamine for Supplemental Analgesia During Elective Cesarean Delivery: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Xu Li-Li LL Wang Chun C Deng Chun-Mei CM Dai Shao-Bing SB Zhou Qun Q Peng Yong-Bao YB Shou Hong-Yan HY Han Yin-Qiu YQ Yu Jing J Liu Chao-Hui CH Xia Feng F Zhang Su-Qin SQ Wang Dong-Xin DX Chen Xin-Zhong XZ

JAMA network open 20230403 4

<h4>Importance</h4>Epidural anesthesia is a primary choice for cesarean delivery, but supplemental analgesics are often required to relieve pain during uterine traction.<h4>Objective</h4>To investigate the sedative and analgesic effects of intravenous esketamine administered before childbirth via cesarean delivery with the patient under epidural anesthesia.<h4>Design, setting, and participants</h4>This multicenter, double-blind randomized clinical trial assessed 903 women 18 years or older who h ...[more]

PMID: 37083664

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionPercutaneous auricular nerve stimulation has been used for the treatment of symptoms associated with opioid withdrawal, including abdominal pain, nausea, and general discomfort. However, its potential utility for pain management and opioid minimization after surgery has not been investigated. The purpose of this study was to test the feasibility and acceptability of a trial protocol designed to assess the effectiveness of the NSS2-Bridge device as a non-pharmacologic alternative to opioids after cesarean delivery.MethodsIn a randomized control design, healthy women receiving cesarean delivery were randomized to receive the active device, placebo device, or no device. Devices were placed on the ear following cesarean delivery and left in place for 5 days. Feasibility and acceptability of the device was assessed by patient reports of device tolerability (rated on a 100mm visual analog scale where 0 is not tolerable at all and 100 is the most tolerable) as well as qualitative reporting. Additional outcomes assessed included proportion of patients not using opioids in hospital, as well as pain at rest, pain with movement, and total opioid consumption in the hospital and for the first 5 days after surgery.ResultsThere were 60 patients included in the final analysis. Device tolerability was rated highly, with an average daily score of >75 mm on the visual analog scale. The trial retention rate was 89.7% with most exclusions (42.9%) occurring due to unanticipated development of care complexity (e.g., hemorrhage and additional surgical procedures), with only 1 exclusion (14.3%) due to device discomfort. The active device group achieved the highest proportion of opioid-free hospitalizations (40%) compared to placebo (20%) and no device groups (30%). Pain at rest and with movement was similar between treatment groups.ConclusionsThis trial protocol designed to test the efficacy of NSS2-Bridge device for post-cesarean pain management is feasible and acceptable. Larger proportions of patients not using opioids in the active device group justifies additional investigation on device effectiveness in pregnant and postpartum people at highest risk for pain.

Project description:BackgroundIntrathecal opioids are routinely administered during spinal anesthesia for postcesarean analgesia. The effectiveness of intrathecal morphine for postcesarean analgesia is well established, and the use of intrathecal hydromorphone is growing. No prospective studies have compared the effectiveness of equipotent doses of intrathecal morphine versus intrathecal hydromorphone as part of a multimodal analgesic regimen for postcesarean analgesia. The authors hypothesized that intrathecal morphine would result in superior analgesia compared with intrathecal hydromorphone 24 h after delivery.MethodsIn this single-center, double-blinded, randomized trial, 138 parturients undergoing scheduled cesarean delivery were randomized to receive 150 µg of intrathecal morphine or 75 µg of intrathecal hydromorphone as part of a primary spinal anesthetic and multimodal analgesic regimen; 134 parturients were included in the analysis. The primary outcome was the numerical rating scale score for pain with movement 24 h after delivery. Static and dynamic pain scores, nausea, pruritus, degree of sedation, and patient satisfaction were assessed every 6 h for 36 h postpartum. Total opioid consumption was recorded.ResultsThere was no significant difference in pain scores with movement at 24 h (intrathecal hydromorphone median [25th, 75th] 4 [3, 5] and intrathecal morphine 3 [2, 4.5]) or at any time point (estimated difference, 0.5; 95% CI, 0 to 1; P = 0.139). Opioid received in the first 24 h did not differ between groups (median [25th, 75th] oral morphine milligram equivalents for intrathecal hydromorphone 30 [7.5, 45.06] vs. intrathecal morphine 22.5 [14.0, 37.5], P = 0.769). From Kaplan-Meier analysis, the median time to first opioid request was 5.4 h for hydromorphone and 12.1 h for morphine (log-rank test P = 0.200).ConclusionsAlthough the hypothesis was that intrathecal morphine would provide superior analgesia to intrathecal hydromorphone, the results did not confirm this. At the doses studied, both intrathecal morphine and intrathecal hydromorphone provide effective postcesarean analgesia when combined with a multimodal analgesia regimen.

Project description:BackgroundDelayed cord clamping (DCC) results in decreased iron deficiency in infancy. The American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology has called for research on the optimal time to clamp the cord during cesarean deliveries (CD). Our objective was to conduct a pilot trial examining the safety of delayed cord clamping (DCC) for maternal-infant dyads during elective cesarean delivery (CD).MethodsWe enrolled 39 dyads [23 at 90 s, 16 at 120 s; (DCC Pilot)] between 10/2013 and 9/2014. We abstracted data from the electronic medical record (EMR) for historical controls (HC) birthing between 1/2012-6/2013 for whom DCC was not performed (n = 112).ResultsAvailable data for 37 mothers and 30 infants compared to HC revealed 174 (95% CI: 61-286) mL lower mean estimated maternal blood loss [(EBL) mean (SD) mL]: DCC Pilot 691(218) vs. HC 864(442), p = 0.003 and lower incidence of maternal transfusions, DCC Pilot 2.7% vs. HC 18.8%, p = 0.016. There was no significant between group difference between DCC Pilot and HC in other a priori definitions of excess maternal blood loss: a) EBL > 800 ml, 21.6% vs. 38.8%, p = 0.07 or b) post-op hgb/pre-op hgb < 80%, 16.7% vs. 20.6%, p = 0.81. There were also no statistically significant between group differences in rates of NICU admission DCC Pilot 8.1% vs. HC 7.1%, p = 1.0., but there was a higher rate of newborn cold stress or hypothermia ≤36.2 °C in study subjects, DCC Pilot 27.0% vs. HC 11.9%, p = 0.038.Prevalence of newborn anemia was decreased [DCC pilot 3.3% (1 of 30) vs. HC 40.0% (4 of 10 infants with data), p = 0.012. No infants were polycythemic.ConclusionsThese pilot data suggest cord clamping can be delayed to 120 s during elective CD without increased risk of excessive maternal blood loss. More aggressive prevention of infant heat loss may be warranted. A randomized trial to evaluate long-term maternal and infant outcomes is indicated.Trial registrationClinical trials.gov, NCT02229162; registered: 1 September, 2014.

Project description:ImportanceApproximately one-third of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) do not respond to available antidepressants.ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy, safety, and dose-response of intranasal esketamine hydrochloride in patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD).Design, setting, and participantsThis phase 2, double-blind, doubly randomized, delayed-start, placebo-controlled study was conducted in multiple outpatient referral centers from January 28, 2014, to September 25, 2015. The study consisted of 4 phases: (1) screening, (2) double-blind treatment (days 1-15), composed of two 1-week periods, (3) optional open-label treatment (days 15-74), and (4) posttreatment follow-up (8 weeks). One hundred twenty-six adults with a DSM-IV-TR diagnosis of MDD and history of inadequate response to 2 or more antidepressants (ie, TRD) were screened, 67 were randomized, and 60 completed both double-blind periods. Intent-to-treat analysis was used in evaluation of the findings.InterventionsIn period 1, participants were randomized (3:1:1:1) to placebo (n = 33), esketamine 28 mg (n = 11), 56 mg (n = 11), or 84 mg (n = 12) twice weekly. In period 2, 28 placebo-treated participants with moderate-to-severe symptoms were rerandomized (1:1:1:1) to 1 of the 4 treatment arms; those with mild symptoms continued receiving placebo. Participants continued their existing antidepressant treatment during the study. During the open-label phase, dosing frequency was reduced from twice weekly to weekly, and then to every 2 weeks.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary efficacy end point was change from baseline to day 8 (each period) in the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score.ResultsSixty-seven participants (38 women, mean [SD] age, 44.7 [10.0] years) were included in the efficacy and safety analyses. Change (least squares mean [SE] difference vs placebo) in MADRS total score (both periods combined) in all 3 esketamine groups was superior to placebo (esketamine 28 mg: -4.2 [2.09], P = .02; 56 mg: -6.3 [2.07], P = .001; 84 mg: -9.0 [2.13], P < .001), with a significant ascending dose-response relationship (P < .001). Improvement in depressive symptoms appeared to be sustained (-7.2 [1.84]) despite reduced dosing frequency in the open-label phase. Three of 56 (5%) esketamine-treated participants during the double-blind phase vs none receiving placebo and 1 of 57 participants (2%) during the open-label phase had adverse events that led to study discontinuation (1 event each of syncope, headache, dissociative syndrome, and ectopic pregnancy).Conclusions and relevanceIn this first clinical study to date of intranasal esketamine for TRD, antidepressant effect was rapid in onset and dose related. Response appeared to persist for more than 2 months with a lower dosing frequency. Results support further investigation in larger trials.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01998958.

Project description:The rising cesarean birth rate has drawn attention to risks associated with repeat cesarean birth. Prevention of adhesions with adhesion barriers has been promoted as a way to decrease operative difficulty. However, robust data demonstrating effectiveness of such interventions are lacking.We report data from a multicenter trial designed to evaluate the short-term safety and effectiveness of a modified sodium hyaluronic acid (HA)-carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) absorbable adhesion barrier for reduction of adhesions following cesarean delivery.Patients who underwent primary or repeat cesarean delivery were included in this multicenter, single-blinded (patient), randomized controlled trial. Patients were randomized into either HA-CMC (N = 380) or no treatment (N = 373). No other modifications to their treatment were part of the protocol. Short-term safety data were collected following randomization. The location and density of adhesions (primary outcome) were assessed at their subsequent delivery using a validated tool, which can also be used to derive an adhesion score that ranges from 0-12.No differences in baseline characteristics, postoperative course, or incidence of complications between the groups following randomization were noted. Eighty patients from the HA-CMC group and 92 controls returned for subsequent deliveries. Adhesions in any location were reported in 75.6% of the HA-CMC group and 75.9% of the controls (P = .99). There was no significant difference in the median adhesion score; 2 (range 0-10) for the HA-CMC group vs 2 (range 0-8) for the control group (P = .65). One third of the HA-CMC patients met the definition for severe adhesions (adhesion score >4) compared to 15.5% in the control group (P = .052). There were no significant differences in the time from incision to delivery (P = .56). Uterine dehiscence in the next pregnancy was reported in 2 patients in HA-CMC group vs 1 in the control group (P = .60).Although we did not identify any short-term safety concerns, HA-CMC adhesion barrier applied at cesarean delivery did not reduce adhesion formation at the subsequent cesarean delivery.

Dataset Information

Efficacy and Safety of Esketamine for Supplemental Analgesia During Elective Cesarean Delivery: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance

Objective

Design, setting, and participants

Intervention

Main outcomes and measures

Results

Conclusions and relevance

Trial registration

Publications

Efficacy and Safety of Esketamine for Supplemental Analgesia During Elective Cesarean Delivery: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets