Dataset Information

Time to Analgesia Onset and Pharmacokinetics After Separate and Combined Administration of Liposome Bupivacaine and Bupivacaine HCl: Considerations for Clinicians.

ABSTRACT: Liposome bupivacaine is a prolonged-release bupivacaine formulation indicated for single-dose administration into the surgical site to produce postsurgical analgesia.An overview of time to onset of analgesia observed with liposome bupivacaine in human studies is provided, as well as a summary of data from pharmacokinetic studies including those that assessed pharmacokinetics after separate versus coadministration of liposome bupivacaine and bupivacaine HCl.Data from multiple studies show that local administration of liposome bupivacaine is associated with rapid onset and effective analgesia after surgery. However, the efficacy profile observed in controlled settings may not replicate the profile observed in clinical practice; time to onset may be impacted by nonpharmacologic factors, such as amount of drug given, location and relative vascularity, and variances in surgical techniques. Some clinicians coadminister or admix bupivacaine HCl and liposome bupivacaine based on the supposition that adjuvant use will result in more rapid onset of efficacy. To date, no clinical studies have been conducted comparing pain-related outcomes following coadministration versus liposome bupivacaine alone. Preclinical pharmacokinetic studies have assessed the potential impact of combined use, which resulted in predictable, additive systemic exposure without compromising the prolonged-release profile of liposome bupivacaine, and without signs of toxicity.Based on available data and approved package insert, in the setting of wound infiltration, clinicians have the flexibility to administer liposome bupivacaine alone, coadminister separately with bupivacaine HCl, or admix with bupivacaine HCl prior to injection, providing the bupivacaine HCl dose does not exceed 50% of the liposome bupivacaine dose.

SUBMITTER: Gadsden J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4897097 | biostudies-other | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Time to Analgesia Onset and Pharmacokinetics After Separate and Combined Administration of Liposome Bupivacaine and Bupivacaine HCl: Considerations for Clinicians.

Gadsden Jeffrey J Long William J WJ

The open orthopaedics journal 20160412

<h4>Background</h4>Liposome bupivacaine is a prolonged-release bupivacaine formulation indicated for single-dose administration into the surgical site to produce postsurgical analgesia.<h4>Methods</h4>An overview of time to onset of analgesia observed with liposome bupivacaine in human studies is provided, as well as a summary of data from pharmacokinetic studies including those that assessed pharmacokinetics after separate versus coadministration of liposome bupivacaine and bupivacaine HCl.<h4> ...[more]

PMID: 27347237

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTransversus abdominis plane (TAP) infiltration has been increasingly used for postsurgical analgesia in abdominal/pelvic procedures; however, duration/extent of analgesia with standard local anesthetics is limited. This pilot study assessed the preliminary efficacy and safety of two volumes of liposome bupivacaine administered via TAP infiltration in patients undergoing robotic laparoscopic prostatectomy.MethodsIn this single-center, open-label, prospective study, patients older than 18 years received TAP infiltration with liposome bupivacaine immediately after surgery. The first 12 patients received a total volume of 20 mL liposome bupivacaine (266 mg); the next 12 received 40 mL liposome bupivacaine (266 mg). The liposome bupivacaine was diluted with 0.9% normal saline. The primary efficacy measure was duration of analgesia, measured by time to first opioid administration. Secondary outcome measures included patient-assessed pain scores, opioid use, and opioid-related adverse events (AEs).ResultsTwenty-four patients received liposome bupivacaine (20 mL, n=12; 40 mL, n=12) and were included in the primary analysis. Three refused participation in a 10-day follow-up visit and did not complete the study. Median time to first opioid administration after surgery was 23 and 26 minutes for the 20 and 40 mL groups, respectively. Mean total amount of postsurgical opioids ranged from 25.4 to 27.3 mg; after hospital discharge to day 10, both groups required a mean of 0.7 oxycodone/acetaminophen tablets/day. Mean pain scores of 4.4 and 5.3 were reported at 1 hour and 3.1 and 3.9 at 2 hours postsurgery, with 20 and 40 mL doses, respectively. Neither group had mean scores higher than 3.0 at any further assessments. No opioid-related or treatment-related serious AEs were reported.ConclusionMedian time to first opioid administration did not differ between the two groups. No differences in secondary outcomes were observed on the basis of volume administered. These initial findings suggest further study of liposome bupivacaine administered via TAP infiltration as part of a multimodal analgesic regimen in laparoscopic robotic prostatectomy may be warranted.

Project description:BackgroundOpioid-based postsurgical analgesia exposes patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy to elevated risk for gastrointestinal motility problems and other opioid-related adverse events (ORAEs). The purpose of our research was to investigate postsurgical outcomes, including opioid consumption, hospital length of stay, and ORAE risk associated with a multimodal analgesia regimen, employing a single administration of liposome bupivacaine as well as other analgesics that act by different mechanisms.MethodsWe analyzed combined results from 6 Phase IV, prospective, single-center studies in which patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy received opioid-based intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) or multimodal analgesia incorporating intraoperative administration of liposome bupivacaine. As-needed rescue therapy was available to all patients. Primary outcome measures were postsurgical opioid consumption, hospital length of stay, and hospitalization costs. Secondary measures included time to first rescue opioid use, patient satisfaction with analgesia (assessed using a 5-point Likert scale), and ORAEs.ResultsEighty-two patients underwent laparoscopic colectomy and did not meet intraoperative exclusion criteria (PCA n = 56; multimodal analgesia n = 26). Compared with the PCA group, the multimodal analgesia group had significantly lower mean total postsurgical opioid consumption (96 vs 32 mg, respectively; P < 0.0001) and shorter median postsurgical hospital length of stay (3.0 vs 4.0 days; P = 0.0019). Geometric mean costs were $11,234 and $13,018 in the multimodal analgesia and PCA groups, respectively (P = 0.2612). Median time to first rescue opioid use was longer in the multimodal analgesia group versus PCA group (1.1 hours vs 0.6 hours, respectively; P=0.0003). ORAEs were experienced by 41% of patients receiving intravenous opioid PCA and 8% of patients receiving multimodal analgesia (P = 0.0019). Study limitations included use of an open-label, nonrandomized design; small population size; and the inability to isolate treatment-related effects specifically attributable to liposome bupivacaine.ConclusionsCompared with intravenous opioid PCA, a liposome bupivacaine-based multimodal analgesia regimen reduced postsurgical opioid use, hospital length of stay, and ORAEs, and may lead to improved postsurgical outcomes following laparoscopic colectomy.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To evaluate bupivacaine concentrations in maternal plasma and transfer into breast milk in women undergoing liposomal bupivacaine infiltration in the transversus abdominis plane after cesarean birth. METHODS:Prospective cohort study of healthy pregnant women who underwent cesarean birth at term followed by a transversus abdominis plane block using 52 mg bupivacaine hydrochloride 0.25% (20 mL) and 266 mg liposomal bupivacaine 1.3% (20 mL). Simultaneous blood and milk samples were collected in a staggered fashion, three to four samples per patient at the following timepoints after block administration: 2, 6, 12, 24, 48, 72, and 96 hours. Quantification of bupivacaine was performed by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Neonatal drug exposure was modeled by calculating milk/plasma area under the curve (AUC) ratios, neonatal dosage, and relative neonatal dosage of bupivacaine at each sampling time. RESULTS:Thirty patients were enrolled. Concentrations in breast milk peaked at 6 hours (mean 58 ng/mL), followed by constant and steady decline to low levels at 96 hours (mean 5.2 ng/mL). Maternal plasma concentrations had two peaks, first at 6 hours (mean 155.9 ng/mL) and then at 48 hours (mean 225.8 ng/mL), followed by steady decline. Milk/plasma AUC0-t ratios ranged between AUC0-2 of 0.45 (80% CI 0.38-0.52) and AUC0-96 of 0.15 (80% CI 0.14-0.17). Neonatal dosage ranged between a mean of 355.9 ng/kg at 0-2 hours and a mean of 15,155.4 ng/kg at 0-96 hours. Relative neonatal dosage was less than 1% at all time intervals. No serious adverse reactions occurred in any neonate. CONCLUSION:Bupivacaine is excreted in breast milk after local infiltration of liposomal bupivacaine and bupivacaine hydrochloride mixture into transversus abdominis plane blocks after cesarean birth. Relative neonatal dosages of less than 1% (less than 10% is considered to be unlikely to be of clinical concern) suggest minimal risks for breastfeeding healthy, term neonates after the administration of this combination of local anesthetics to mothers. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03526419.

Project description:ObjectivesPrevious virtual care literature within the field of speech-language pathology has primarily focused on validating the virtual use of intervention programmes. There are fewer articles addressing the validity of conducting virtual assessments, particularly standardized assessment of oral language and literacy abilities in children. In addition, there is a lack of practical, useful recommendations available to support clinicians and researchers on how to conduct these assessment measures virtually. Given the recent rapid rise in virtual care and research as a result of the Coronavirus-19 pandemic, clinicians and researchers require guidance on best practices for virtual administration of these tools imminently. This article seeks to fill this gap in the literature by providing such recommendations.MethodsWe (a) completed a narrative review of the extant literature, and (b) conducted semi-structured interviews with a group of 12 clinicians, students and researchers who had administered standardized language and literacy assessments with a variety of monolingual and multilingual school-aged children, with and without speech and language difficulties, in clinical and research settings. Six themes: candidacy for virtual assessment, communication and collaboration with caregivers, technology and equipment, virtual administration, ethics, consent and confidentiality, and considerations for bilingual populations were identified as a result of these two processes and were used to develop a set of recommendations to guide the use of standardized assessments in a virtual setting. In line with the Guidelines International Network, these recommendations were rated by group members, and reviewed by external stakeholders. A quasi-Delphi consensus procedure was used to reach agreement on ratings for recommendations.ResultsWe have developed and outlined several recommendations for clinicians and researchers to guide their use of standardized language and literacy assessments in virtual care, across six key themes.ConclusionsThis article is one of the first to share practical recommendations for virtual assessment in the domain of oral language and literacy assessment for clinicians and researchers. We hope the current recommendations will facilitate future clinical research in this area, and as the body of research in this field grows, this article will act as a basis for the development of formal Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Project description:Opioid analgesics have been a standard modality for postoperative pain management after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) but are also associated with increased risk of nausea, pruritus, vomiting, respiratory depression, prolonged ileus, and cognitive dysfunction. There is still a need for a method of anesthesia that can deliver effective long-term postoperative pain relief without incurring the high cost and health burden of opioids and nerve blocks.(1) Is liposomal bupivacaine-based periarticular injection (PAI) more effective than morphine-based spinal anesthesia or ropivacaine-based PAI in controlling postoperative pain after TKA? (2) Do patients treated with liposomal bupivacaine-based PAI experience fewer opioid-related adverse events compared with patients treated with morphine-based spinal anesthesia or ropivacaine-based PAI in controlling postoperative pain after TKA?This multicenter, blind trial randomized 119 patients undergoing TKA with spinal anesthesia to receive spinal anesthesia plus periarticular injection with liposomal bupivacaine (40 patients), spinal anesthesia with bupivacaine plus intrathecal morphine (41 patients) but no liposomal bupivacaine injection, or spinal anesthesia with bupivacaine (38 patients) and no liposomal bupivacaine injection. The two groups that did not receive periarticular liposomal bupivacaine did receive periarticular injection with ropivacaine, and all three groups had ketorolac (30 mg) plus epinephrine (1:1000) in the periarticular injections. Patients in all three groups received identical perioperative multimodal analgesic and antiemetic drugs. All patients were analyzed in the group to which they were randomized and no patients were lost to followup. The primary study endpoints were visual analog score (VAS) for pain and narcotic use during postoperative day 1. Secondary endpoints included side effects associated with narcotic administration during the hospital stay.Mean VAS pain in the liposomal bupivacaine PAI group was lower than that for the ropivacaine PAI group at 6 hours (1.8 ± 2.1 versus 3.3 ± 2.3, p = 0.005, mean difference: 1.5, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.5-2.5) and 12 hours (1.5 ± 2.0 versus 3.3 ± 2.4, p < 0.001, mean difference: 1.8, 95% CI, 0.8-2.8) after surgery. The morphine spinal group had lower pain compared with the liposomal bupivacaine PAI group at 6 hours (0.9 ± 1.8 versus 1.8 ± 2.1, p = 0.035, mean difference: 1.0, 95% CI, 0.1-1.8), but there was no difference at 12 hours (0.8 ± 1.5 versus 1.5 ± 2.0, p = 0.086, mean difference: 0.7, 95% CI, -0.1 to 1.5). The magnitude of the differences at 6 and 12 hours are near the lower end of minimal clinically important differences reported in the literature, and thus the improvement shown in this study may only represent a small clinical improvement. Both the liposomal bupivacaine group (13% [five of 40]) and the ropivacaine group (5% [two of 38]) had fewer incidents of itching (pruritus) than the spinal morphine group (38% [15 of 41]) (p = 0.001).This prospective multicenter three-arm blind randomized controlled trial showed potentially improved pain control at 6 and 12 hours in the liposomal bupivacaine and intrathecal morphine groups compared with the ropivacaine group at the cost of much higher incidences of pruritus (itching) in the intrathecal morphine group. Based on these results, we prefer the use of PAI with liposomal bupivacaine as an alternative to spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine as a result of similar postoperative pain control and the potential for reducing adverse events.Level I, therapeutic study.

Dataset Information

Time to Analgesia Onset and Pharmacokinetics After Separate and Combined Administration of Liposome Bupivacaine and Bupivacaine HCl: Considerations for Clinicians.

Publications

Time to Analgesia Onset and Pharmacokinetics After Separate and Combined Administration of Liposome Bupivacaine and Bupivacaine HCl: Considerations for Clinicians.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets