This trial assessed the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and safety of liposomal bupivacaine given via ultrasound-guided popliteal sciatic nerve block with or without immediate-release bupivacaine hydrochloride in adults having bunionectomies. Forty-five adults were enrolled into four sequential cohorts: (1) liposomal bupivacaine 266 mg with bupivacaine hydrochloride 50 mg; (2) liposomal bupivacaine 133 mg with bupivacaine hydrochloride 50 mg; (3) liposomal bupivacaine 266 mg; or (4) bupivacaine hydrochloride 100 mg. Outcomes included pharmacokinetics (e.g., bupivacaine maximum plasma concentration [Cmax]), onset and duration of motor and sensory nerve block, and safety. Liposomal bupivacaine admixed with bupivacaine hydrochloride produced biphasic bupivacaine plasma disposition profiles with two distinct peaks. Geometric mean Cmax of the early peak ranged from 235 to 421 ng/mL and the geometric mean of the late Cmax was ∼30%-50% lower than the early peak. Median time to sensory block onset was 18 to 29 min in all cohorts. Sensory blocks lasted about twice as long with liposomal bupivacaine (median, 119-167 h) than with bupivacaine hydrochloride alone (median, 67 h). There were no serious adverse events. In conclusion, liposomal bupivacaine provided prolonged sensory nerve block when given as popliteal sciatic nerve blocks with or without bupivacaine hydrochloride, and bupivacaine plasma concentrations were well below the lower bound of the toxicity threshold of 2000 ng/mL for all cohorts.

Background Nonopioid management of postsurgical pain remains a major unmet need. Few studies have evaluated TRPV1 agonists for analgesia after surgery. We studied intraoperative vocacapsaicin, a novel prodrug of the TRPV1 agonist capsaicin, in a validated model of postsurgical pain. Methods This was a triple-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging trial in patients undergoing bunionectomy. We randomized patients 1:1:1:1 to surgical site administration of 14 mL of placebo or one of three vocacapsaicin concentrations: 0.30, 0.15, or 0.05 mg/mL. The prespecified primary endpoint was the area-under-the-curve of the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) pain score at rest through 96 hours for the 0.3 mg/mL group. Prespecified ordered, secondary endpoints for the 0.3 mg/mL group included percent of patients who did not require opioids from 0-96 hours, total opioid consumption through 96 hours, and the area-under-the-curve of the NRS pain score for the first week. Results We randomized 147 patients. During the first 96 hours, vocacapsaicin 0.30 mg/mL reduced pain at rest by 33% vs. placebo (primary endpoint, 95% CI [10%, 52%], effect size (Cohen’s D) = 0.61, p = 0.005). Twenty-six percent of patients receiving vocacapsaicin 0.30 mg/mL did not require postoperative opioids for analgesia (p=0.025) vs. 5% of patients receiving placebo. Vocacapsaicin 0.30 mg/mL reduced opioid consumption over the first 96 hours by 50% vs. placebo (95% CI [26%, 67%], effect size = 0.76, p = 0.002). Vocacapsaicin 0.30 mg/mL reduced pain over the first week by 37% vs. placebo (95% CI [12%, 57%], effect size = 0.62, p = 0.004). Treatment effect persisted for at least 2 weeks. All study endpoints showed an administered concentration vs. response relationship. Vocacapsaicin was well-tolerated with no differences between groups in any safety parameter. Conclusions A single, local administration of vocacapsaicin during surgery reduced pain and opioid consumption for at least 96 hours after surgery compared to control. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03599089

INTRODUCTION:Surgical site infiltration with bupivacaine hydrochloride (HCl) is a standard element of postoperative analgesia for soft tissue surgeries, but results in short-lived analgesia. A novel bupivacaine implant, XARACOLL (bupivacaine HCl), is Food and Drug Administration approved for treatment of acute postsurgical pain following adult inguinal herniorrhaphy. This study examined the efficacy and safety of the bupivacaine implant (300 mg) compared with placebo for postsurgical pain after abdominoplasty.METHODS:In this double-blind, placebo-controlled study, patients undergoing abdominoplasty were randomized to three 100 mg bupivacaine implants or three placebo collagen implants, in a 1:1 ratio, implanted intraoperatively. No other analgesics were administered into the surgical site. Patients were allowed opioids and acetaminophen for postoperative pain. Patients were followed for up to 30 days after treatment.PRIMARY OUTCOME:the analgesic effect of the bupivacaine implants through 24 hours postsurgery, measured by the sum of time-weighted pain intensity (SPI24). Prespecified key secondary outcomes included SPI48 and SPI72, percentage of opioid-free patients through 24, 48, and 72 hours, and adverse events, which were tested sequentially to control for multiplicity (ie, if the first variable failed to reach significance, no subsequent variables were declared statistically significant).RESULTS:The bupivacaine implant patients (n=181) reported statistically significant lower SPI24 (mean (SD) SPI24=102 (43), 95% CI 95 to 109) compared with placebo patients (n=184; SPI24=117 (45), 95% CI 111 to 123, p=0.002). SPI48 was 190 (88, 95% CI 177 to 204) for INL-001 and 206 (96, 95% CI 192 to 219) for placebo, and not significantly different between groups. The subsequent secondary variables were therefore declared not statistically significant. SPI72 was 265 (131, 95% CI 244 to 285) for INL-001 and 281 (146, 95% CI 261 to 301) for placebo. The opioid-free percentage of patients at 24, 48, and 72 hours was 19%, 17%, and 17% for INL-001 and 6.5% for placebo patients (at all timepoints). The only adverse event occurring in ≥5% of patients and for which proportion INL-001 >placebo was back pain (7.7% vs 7.6%).CONCLUSION:The study design was limited by not containing an active comparator. Compared with placebo, INL-001 provides postoperative analgesia that is temporally aligned with the period of maximal postsurgical pain in abdominoplasty and offers a favorable safety profile.TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT04785625.

Introduction: Postoperative mobilization requires effective management of pain with movement. Vocacapsaicin (formerly CA-008) is a water-soluble prodrug of capsaicin, a well-characterized TRPV1 receptor agonist. Intraoperative injection of vocacapsaicin reduced pain and opioid consumption for 2 weeks after total knee arthroplasty and bunionectomy. This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study evaluated safety and efficacy of vocacapsaicin after open laparotomy for ventral hernia repair (VHR). Methods: After internal review board approval and written informed consent, patients underwent elective, open VHR with mesh (Rives-Stoppa) under general anesthesia with standard-of-care perioperative analgesia including bilateral bupivacaine rectus blocks and peri-incisional bupivacaine infiltration. (ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT04774328). Before closing, placebo or vocacapsaicin 24 mg in 80 mL saline was infiltrated into the surgical site. Endpoints included serial numerical rating scales (NRS) for pain with activity (coughing, ambulation) and opioid consumption over 96 hours. Multiple local and systemic safety endpoints, including wound healing, were measured repeatedly through postoperative day 28. Results: Twenty-four patients were enrolled. Through the first 96 hours, vocacapsaicin reduced pain on coughing 46% (p = 0.02, ANOVA), pain on ambulation 35% (p = 0.08), pain at rest 21% (p = nonsignificant [NS]) and cumulative opioid consumption 26% (p = NS). A trend towards improved analgesia persisted through 8 days. There was no difference between vocacapsaicin and placebo in the safety analysis through day 28. Conclusion: This pilot study suggests that a single intraoperative dose of vocacapsaicin provides clinically meaningful pain reduction for 96 hours after open laparotomy when added to a standard-of-care analgesic regimen. There were no safety concerns. The results are consistent with previous results in orthopaedic surgery.

OBJECTIVE:This analysis reports the healthcare professional global assessment (HPGA) and patient global assessment (PGA) scores and the adverse event (AE) profile by age, body mass index (BMI), sex, and race from the three Phase III registration studies for sufentanil sublingual tablet (SST) 30 mcg.METHODS:Global assessments and treatment-related AEs were analyzed from patients treated with SST 30 mcg for moderate-to-severe acute pain following surgery or in the emergency department (ED). Pooled data were analyzed across patient demographic subgroups.RESULTS:A total of 283 patients were included in the HPGA/PGA analyses. The majority underwent abdominal surgery, with the remaining patients undergoing orthopedic or "other" types of surgery. Overall, SST 30 mcg was highly rated by both healthcare professionals and patients across the demographic subgroups. A total of 323 patients were included in the safety evaluation. The majority of patients did not experience any SST-related AEs; however, those that did experienced common opioid-related side effects such as nausea, headache, dizziness, and vomiting. No patients experienced unexpected AEs or required the use of naloxone.CONCLUSION:SST 30 mcg was highly rated and well tolerated across demographic subgroups with the majority of patients not experiencing any adverse event related to SST 30 mcg. These findings support the use of sublingual sufentanil in all adult patients, regardless of age, BMI, sex, or race for the treatment of moderate-to-severe acute pain.

Background and Objective Oral tramadol, an atypical opioid approved in the United States (US) since 1995 and a Schedule IV controlled substance, has less abuse liability compared to Schedule II conventional opioids. Intravenous (IV) tramadol is not available in the US, but has the potential to fill a gap between non-opioid medications and conventional opioids for treatment of acute pain. This study evaluates IV tramadol in the management of postoperative pain compared to placebo and standard-of-care active control. Methods A phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, three-arm, randomized, placebo- and active-controlled, multiple-dose, parallel-group study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 50 mg IV tramadol versus placebo and 4 mg IV morphine over 48 h in patients with postoperative pain following abdominoplasty surgery. Results IV tramadol was statistically superior ( p < 0.05) to placebo and comparable to IV morphine for the primary and all key secondary efficacy outcomes and demonstrated numerically lower rates for the incidence of most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) compared to morphine. No unexpected findings were observed for TEAEs, laboratory tests, vital signs, or electrocardiograms (ECGs). Over 90% of patients completed the study. Conclusion The study demonstrated that IV tramadol 50 mg is highly effective in the management of postoperative pain following abdominoplasty. The consistency of effects between tramadol and morphine (as compared to placebo) for primary and key secondary endpoints validates the efficacy of tramadol observed. The study also provided direct evidence of improved tolerability of IV tramadol over a standard-of-care conventional Schedule II opioid. IV tramadol may become a useful option in patients where exposure to conventional opioids is not desired.

Purpose: There is a need to reduce exposure to Schedule II opioids in the United States (US) due to the ongoing opioid epidemic. Schedule II opioids have higher potential for abuse and misuse than Schedule IV opioids. This Phase 3, multicenter, single-arm, open-label, multiple-dose US trial evaluated the safety and tolerability of intravenous tramadol 50 mg, a Schedule IV opioid, in the management of postoperative pain in a real-world setting, where intravenous tramadol is not yet approved for use. Patients and Methods: Patients undergoing a range of soft-tissue and orthopedic surgeries were enrolled. Intravenous tramadol 50 mg was given at hours 0, 2, 4, and every 4 h thereafter through up to 7 days of treatment. Non-opioid medications per treating physicians' discretion were allowed if additional pain relief was needed. Endpoints included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), laboratories, vital signs, electrocardiograms (ECGs), and patient global assessment (PGA) of effectiveness. Results: A total of 251 patients were enrolled, with 4% discontinuing due to TEAE; no patient discontinued due to a lack of efficacy. Patients averaged 13 doses, resulting in average 48 h of exposure. Intravenous tramadol was well tolerated, with TEAEs consistent with known tramadol pharmacology. No unexpected findings were observed, with 95% of patients reporting study medication was good, very good, or excellent for controlling pain. Conclusion: Outcomes from this real world use study demonstrated intravenous tramadol 50 mg was safe and well tolerated in the management of postoperative pain where intravenous conventional opioids are often used. Intravenous tramadol alone or coadministered with nonopioid medication (when needed) as a multimodal combination analgesia approach resulted in high patient satisfaction with their pain relief In light of the US opioid epidemic, reducing the exposure to conventional opioids in these patients via use of IV tramadol may be possible.

This study is part of the registrational program for intravenously administered (IV) tramadol in the USA and compared the analgesic benefit and tolerability of two doses of IV tramadol (50 mg and 25 mg) to placebo in adult patients undergoing bunionectomy, an orthopedic surgical model. This was a phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, three-arm, randomized, placebo-controlled, multiple-dose, parallel-group trial to evaluate IV tramadol in the management of postoperative pain following bunionectomy. Eligible patients were randomized (1:1:1 ratio) to IV tramadol 50 mg, 25 mg, or placebo. Primary endpoint was summary of pain intensity differences over 48 h (SPID48). Key secondary endpoints included SPID24, total consumption of rescue analgesia, and patient global assessment of efficacy (PGA). Safety assessments included treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs), clinical laboratory tests, vital signs, and electrocardiograms (ECGs). Assessment of the dose–response was an important objective of the study. The study established a dose response, with IV tramadol 50 mg demonstrating statistically significant benefit (p < 0.05) over placebo for primary and all key secondary efficacy endpoints, whereas tramadol 25 mg demonstrated intermediate results between the 50 mg and placebo arms. IV tramadol 50 mg was well tolerated; most common TEAEs were nausea and vomiting; and there were no meaningful differences among treatments for vital signs, ECG, and laboratory assessments. The largest proportion of patients completed tramadol 50 mg (98.6%) compared to tramadol 25 mg (91.8%) and placebo (88.2%). IV tramadol 50 mg was effective and well tolerated as treatment for postoperative pain following bunionectomy surgery, while IV tramadol 25 mg, although well tolerated, was judged an ineffective dose for the treatment of pain in this setting. IV tramadol 50 mg was further developed in the registrational program for the USA. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03290378.

BACKGROUND:HTX-011 is an extended-release, dual-acting local anesthetic consisting of bupivacaine and low-dose meloxicam in a novel polymer that is administered by needle-free application during surgery. The active ingredients are released from the polymer by controlled diffusion over 72 hours. METHODS:This phase 2b, double-blind, placebo-controlled and active-controlled trial enrolled patients undergoing primary unilateral total knee arthroplasty under general anesthesia. Two hundred thirty-two patients were randomized into 4 groups: HTX-011 400 mg bupivacaine/12 mg meloxicam, applied without a needle into the surgical site, the same dose of HTX-011 with a separate 50 mg ropivacaine injection into the posterior capsule, bupivacaine hydrochloride (HCl) 125 mg injection, and saline placebo injection. Only opioids were permitted for postoperative pain rescue. Primary and key secondary endpoints were mean area under the curve of pain intensity scores over 48 hours and 72 hours, respectively, for HTX-011 groups vs placebo. RESULTS:Both HTX-011 groups had significantly reduced mean pain intensity vs placebo through 48 and 72 hours (both P < .001). Ropivacaine added a small initial benefit in the first 12 hours. Both HTX-011 groups also had decreased mean pain intensity vs bupivacaine HCl alone through 48 and 72 hours (P < .05). The HTX-011 groups had significantly earlier discharge readiness along with lower opioid consumption through 72 hours. HTX-011 alone or with ropivacaine was well-tolerated with a safety profile similar to controls. CONCLUSION:Needle-free application of HTX-011 400 mg bupivacaine/12 mg meloxicam provided superior pain reduction through 72 hours after total knee arthroplasty compared with placebo and bupivacaine HCl alone.

BACKGROUND:Although antiemetics are commonly used to prevent postoperative nausea or vomiting, the failure rate is appreciable and there is currently no generally accepted standard for rescue treatment of postoperative nausea or vomiting after failed prophylaxis. This prospective, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, multicenter study was designed to test the hypothesis that intravenous amisulpride, a dopamine D2/D3-antagonist, is superior to placebo at treating established postoperative nausea or vomiting after failed prophylaxis.METHODS:A total of 2,285 adult patients undergoing surgery under general inhalational anesthesia and receiving standard antiemetic prophylaxis were enrolled at 23 sites in Canada, France, Germany, and the United States. Of these, 702 patients experienced postoperative nausea or vomiting in the 24-h period after surgery and were randomized to receive a single dose of 5 or 10 mg intravenous amisulpride or matching placebo. The primary endpoint was complete response, defined as no emesis or rescue antiemetic use for 24 h after study drug administration, excluding emesis in the first 30 min. Secondary endpoints included incidence of emesis and rescue medication use, nausea burden, time to treatment failure, and length of stay in postanesthesia care unit and hospital.RESULTS:Complete response occurred in significantly more patients receiving 10 mg amisulpride (96 of 230, 41.7%) than placebo (67 of 235, 28.5%), a 13.2% difference (95% CI, 4.6 to 21.8; odds ratio, 1.80; P = 0.006). A 5-mg dose of amisulpride did not show a significant benefit (80 of 237, 33.8%); the difference from placebo was 5.2% (95% CI, 3.1 to 13.6; odds ratio, 1.24; P = 0.109). The total number of adverse events recorded and proportion of patients with at least one adverse event were comparable between the placebo and amisulpride groups. No clinically relevant toxicities were observed.CONCLUSIONS:A single 10-mg dose of intravenous amisulpride was safe and more effective than placebo at treating established postoperative nausea or vomiting in patients failing postoperative nausea or vomiting prophylaxis.

Purpose: To aid nurses in dosing sufentanil sublingual tablet (SST) 30 mcg administered via a single-dose applicator, dosing requirements and efficacy of SST 30 mcg were analyzed across age, sex, race, and body mass index subgroups. Design: Patient characteristics were pooled from three postoperative studies (two placebo-controlled and one open-label) and one open-label emergency department study. Drug dosing and efficacy data were pooled from the postoperative studies. Methods: Efficacy was assessed through summed pain intensity difference to baseline during 12 hours across subgroups. Findings: Mean (standard deviation) drug doses administered from 0 to 12 hours was 3.9 (2.0) for SST 30 mcg and was less frequent for older (>= 65 years) versus younger patients. The summed pain intensity difference to baseline during 12 hours was superior with SST 30 mcg versus placebo across all subgroups. Conclusions: SST 30 mcg is a sublingual opioid analgesic with efficacy across demographic subgroups. (C) 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier, Inc. on behalf of American Society of PeriAnesthesia Nurses. All rights reserved.

Aim: To evaluate the pooled safety of sufentanil sublingual tablets (SSTs) administered at 30-mcg dose equivalents over ≤72 h for moderate-to-severe acute pain management in medically supervised settings. Patients & methods: Safety data from SST 30 mcg Phase III studies were pooled with an additional patient subset from studies in which two SST 15 mcg were self-administered within 20–25 min (30-mcg dose-equivalent). Results: Analyses included 804 patients. Median (range) SST 30-mcg dosing over 24 h was 7.0 (1–15) tablets. Adverse events (AEs) were experienced by 60.5% (SST) and 61.4% (placebo) and treatment-related AEs by 43.8% (SST) and 33.5% (placebo; 10.3% difference; 95% CI: 2.0–18.6) of patients. No dose-dependent increase in oxygen desaturation was observed with SST. Conclusion: SST was well-tolerated, with most AEs considered mild or moderate in severity.

Background:. A nanocrystal intravenous (IV) formulation of meloxicam is being studied with the aim of providing postoperative analgesia. Methods:. This randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluated meloxicam IV 30 mg or placebo (≤ 3 doses) in 219 subjects undergoing abdominoplasty. The primary endpoint was the summed pain intensity difference over 24 hours postdose (SPID24). Results:. Meloxicam IV–treated subjects had a statistically significant reduction in the least squares mean of SPID24 compared with placebo-treated subjects (−4,262.1 versus −3,535.7; P = 0.0145). Meloxicam IV was associated with statistically significant differences over placebo on several other secondary endpoints, including other SPID intervals (ie, SPID12, SPID48, and SPID24–48), achievement of perceptible pain relief, the proportion of subjects with a ≥ 30% improvement in the first 24 hours, and Patient Global Assessment of pain at hour 48. Meloxicam IV was also associated with a reduction in the number of subjects receiving opioid rescue medication during hours 24–48 and the total number of doses of opioid rescue analgesia. Meloxicam IV was generally well tolerated, with the numbers and frequencies of adverse events similar to that of the placebo group. There was no evidence of an increased risk of adverse events commonly associated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs including bleeding, thrombotic, cardiovascular, renal, hepatic, cardiovascular, injection site, and wound healing events. Conclusion:. Meloxicam IV provided sustained pain relief and generally was well tolerated in subjects with moderate-to-severe pain following abdominoplasty.

Surgical site infiltration with bupivacaine results in short-lived analgesia. The MATRIX-1 and MATRIX-2 studies examined the efficacy and safety of the bioresorbable bupivacaine HCl collagen-matrix implant (INL-001) for postsurgical pain after open inguinal hernia repair. INL-001, designed to provide early and extended delivery of bupivacaine, provides prolonged duration of perioperative analgesia.

BACKGROUND:Postoperative nausea and vomiting causes distress for patients and can prolong care requirements. Consensus guidelines recommend use of multiple antiemetics from different mechanistic classes as prophylaxis in patients at high risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting. The prophylactic efficacy of the dopamine D2/D3 antagonist amisulpride in combination with other antiemetics was investigated.METHODS:This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, international, multicenter trial was conducted in 1,147 adult surgical patients having three or four postoperative nausea and vomiting risk factors. Patients were randomized to receive either intravenous amisulpride (5 mg) or matching placebo at induction of general anesthesia, in addition to one standard, nondopaminergic antiemetic, most commonly ondansetron or dexamethasone. Vomiting/retching, nausea, and use of rescue medication were recorded for 24 h after wound closure. The primary endpoint was complete response, defined as no emesis or rescue medication use in the 24-h postoperative period.RESULTS:Complete response occurred in 330 of 572 (57.7%) of the amisulpride group and 268 of 575 (46.6%) of the control group (difference 11.1 percentage points; 95% CI, 5.3 to 16.8; P < 0.001). The incidences of emesis (13.8% vs. 20.0%, P = 0.003), any nausea (50.0% vs. 58.3%, P = 0.002), significant nausea (37.1% vs. 47.7%, P < 0.001), and rescue medication use (40.9% vs. 49.4%, P = 0.002) were significantly lower in the amisulpride group. Adverse events and laboratory and electrocardiogram abnormalities occurred no more frequently with amisulpride than with placebo.CONCLUSIONS:Intravenous amisulpride was safe and effective as prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting when given in combination with an antiemetic from another class to adult patients at high risk for suffering postoperative nausea and vomiting undergoing elective surgery under inhalational general anesthesia.VISUAL ABSTRACT:An online visual overview is available for this article at http://links.lww.com/ALN/B727.

Anesthesiology, V 128 • No 6 1099 June 2018 W ITHOUT effective prophylaxis, nausea and/or vomiting in the 24 h after surgical operations under volatile anesthesia may occur in 60 to 80% of patients with at least three of the recognized risk factors for postoperative nausea and vomiting: female sex, prior history of postoperative nausea and vomiting or motion sickness, nonsmoker, and expected use of postoperative opioid analgesia.1 Agents blocking a variety of neurotransmitter pathways, including serotonin 5-HT3, dopamine D2, and histamine H1, have been shown to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting in a proportion of patients, as have corticosteroids, the mechanism of action of which is unclear.2–4 Because it cannot be predicted which pathway(s) will be active in a patient, consensus guidelines recommend that patients at high risk of suffering postoperative nausea and vomiting should be given prophylaxis with a combination of antiemetics with different mechanisms of action.5 Evidence from a large trial of factorial design suggests that antiemetics of different classes provide What We Already Know about This Topic

Background: Postoperative nausea and vomiting causes distress for patients and can prolong care requirements. Consensus guidelines recommend use of multiple antiemetics from different mechanistic classes as prophylaxis in patients at high risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting. The prophylactic efficacy of the dopamine D-2/D-3 antagonist amisulpride in combination with other antiemetics was investigated. Methods: This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, international, multicenter trial was conducted in 1,147 adult surgical patients having three or four postoperative nausea and vomiting risk factors. Patients were randomized to receive either intravenous amisulpride (5 mg) or matching placebo at induction of general anesthesia, in addition to one standard, nondopaminergic antiemetic, most commonly ondansetron or dexamethasone. Vomiting/retching, nausea, and use of rescue medication were recorded for 24 h after wound closure. The primary endpoint was complete response, defined as no emesis or rescue medication use in the 24-h postoperative period. Results: Complete response occurred in 330 of 572 (57.7%) of the amisulpride group and 268 of 575 (46.6%)) of the control group (difference 11.1 percentage points; 95% CI, 5.3 to 16.8; P < 0.001). The incidences of emesis (13.8% vs. 20.0%, P = 0.003), any nausea (50.0% vs. 58.3%, P = 0.002), significant nausea (37.1% vs. 47.7%, P < 0.001), and rescue medication use (40.9% vs. 49.4%), P = 0.002) were significantly lower in the amisulpride group. Adverse events and laboratory and electrocardiogram abnormalities occurred no more frequently with amisulpride than with placebo. Conclusions: Intravenous amisulpride was safe and effective as prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting when given in combination with an antiemetic from another class to adult patients at high risk for suffering postoperative nausea and vomiting undergoing elective surgery under inhalational general anesthesia.

Abstract Background Two essentially identical, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group phase III studies evaluated the efficacy of intravenous amisulpride, a dopamine D2/D3 antagonist, in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in adult surgical patients. Methods Adult inpatients undergoing elective surgery during general anesthesia and having at least two of the four Apfel risk factors for postoperative nausea and vomiting were enrolled at 9 U.S. and 10 European sites. A single 5-mg dose of amisulpride or matching placebo was given at induction of anesthesia. The primary endpoint was complete response, defined as no vomiting/retching and no use of antiemetic rescue medication in the 24-h postoperative period. Nausea incidence was a secondary endpoint. Results Across the two studies, 689 patients were randomized and dosed with study medication, of whom 626 were evaluable per protocol. In the U.S. study, 46.9% (95% CI, 39.0 to 54.9) of patients achieved complete response in the amisulpride group compared to 33.8% (95% CI, 26.2 to 42.0) in the placebo group (P = 0.026). In the European study, complete response rates were 57.4% (95% CI, 49.2 to 65.3) for amisulpride and 46.6% (95% CI, 38.8 to 54.6) for placebo (P = 0.070). Nausea occurred less often in patients who received amisulpride than those who received placebo. There was no clinically significant difference in the safety profile of amisulpride and placebo; in particular, there were no differences in terms of QT prolongation, extrapyramidal side effects, or sedation. Conclusions One of the two trials demonstrated superiority, while pooling both in a post hoc change to the plan of analysis supported the hypothesis that amisulpride was safe and superior to placebo in reducing the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting in a population of adult inpatients at moderate to high risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting.