Abstract
Background: Head-to-head comparisons of combinations of more than one non-opioid analgesic (NOA) with morphine alone, for postoperative analgesia, are lacking. The objective of this multicentre, randomised, double-blind controlled trial was to compare the morphine-sparing effects of different combinations of three NOAs—paracetamol (P), nefopam (N), and ketoprofen (K)—for postoperative analgesia. Methods: Patients from 10 hospitals were randomised to one of eight groups: control (C) received saline as placebo, P, N, K, PN, PK, NK, and PNK. Treatments were given intravenously four times a day during the first 48 h after surgery, and morphine patient-controlled analgesia was used as rescue analgesia. The outcome measures were morphine consumption, pain scores, and morphine-related side-effects evaluated 24 and 48 h after surgery. Results: Two hundred and thirty-seven patients undergoing a major surgical procedure were included between July 2013 and November 2016. Despite a failure to reach a calculated sample size, 24 h morphine consumption [median (inter-quartile range)] was significantly reduced in the PNK group [5 (1–11) mg] compared with either the C group [27 (11–42) mg; P<0.05] or the N group [21 (12–29) mg; P<0.05]. Results were similar 48 h after surgery. Patients experienced less pain in the PNK group compared with the C, N, and P groups. No difference was observed in the incidence of morphine-related side-effects. Conclusions: Combining three NOAs with morphine allows a significant morphine sparing for 48 h after surgery associated with superior analgesia the first 24 h when compared with morphine alone. Clinical trial registration: EudraCT: 2012-004219-30; NCT01882530.
Author supplied keywords
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Beloeil, H., Albaladejo, P., Sion, A., Durand, M., Martinez, V., Lasocki, S., … Veaceslav, S. (2019). Multicentre, prospective, double-blind, randomised controlled clinical trial comparing different non-opioid analgesic combinations with morphine for postoperative analgesia: the OCTOPUS study. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 122(6), e98–e106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2018.10.058
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.