Chui C Chong1, Stephan A Schug2. 1. Department of Anaesthesia and Pain, Royal Perth Hospital, GPO Box X2213, Perth, WA, 6847, Australia. chui.chong@health.wa.gov.au. 2. Emeritus Professor and Honorary Senior Research Fellow, Anaesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Medical School, University of Western Australia, Royal Perth Hospital, Level 4 MRF Building, GPO Box X2213, Perth, WA, 6847, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE:Ketamine is an N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor (NMDA) antagonist used widely as an intravenous analgesic for treatment of acute pain. Its use as oral and sublingual analgesics is not well studied. This study aims to compare the clinical efficacy and tolerability of oral (PO) versus sublingual (SL) ketamine lozenges in adult patients with moderate-to-severe breakthrough pain. METHODS: The study had a randomized, double-blind crossover design in 23 inpatients requiringketamine as rescue analgesics when pain scores exceeded 4/10 on the Numerical Rating Scales. Each participant received either SL 50 mg ketamine lozenge and PO placebo lozenge or SL placebo lozenge and PO 50 mg ketamine lozenge in two treatment periods with a minimum 24-h washout. Pain scores and adverse effects were documented half hourly for the first 2 h, then one hourly for the next 2 h after treatment. The time to first effect and time to meaningful pain relief were recorded. Patients reported their satisfaction and a global impression of change (GIC) at the end of each treatment period. Data were analysed using random effects regression models. RESULTS: Sixteen subjects completed both days, 7 completed 1 day. Time to first effect was 13.1 min PO versus 6.6 min SL (p = 0.069), time to meaningful pain relief was 29.4 min PO versus 10.8 min SL (p = 0.02). Pain scores were not significantly different at all time points post-treatment. Satisfaction and GIC scores were similar for both groups. Overall, adverse events occurred more often with SL administration (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Sublingual administration of ketamine led to a faster onset of pain relief (but also a higher adverse event rate), but in all other aspects treatment with ketamine given sublingually and orally produced similar analgesic effects. ACTRN: ACTRN12621000240842, 08/03/2021, retrospectively registered.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE:Ketamine is an N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor (NMDA) antagonist used widely as an intravenous analgesic for treatment of acute pain. Its use as oral and sublingual analgesics is not well studied. This study aims to compare the clinical efficacy and tolerability of oral (PO) versus sublingual (SL) ketamine lozenges in adult patients with moderate-to-severe breakthrough pain. METHODS: The study had a randomized, double-blind crossover design in 23 inpatients requiring ketamine as rescue analgesics when pain scores exceeded 4/10 on the Numerical Rating Scales. Each participant received either SL 50 mg ketamine lozenge and PO placebo lozenge or SL placebo lozenge and PO 50 mg ketamine lozenge in two treatment periods with a minimum 24-h washout. Pain scores and adverse effects were documented half hourly for the first 2 h, then one hourly for the next 2 h after treatment. The time to first effect and time to meaningful pain relief were recorded. Patients reported their satisfaction and a global impression of change (GIC) at the end of each treatment period. Data were analysed using random effects regression models. RESULTS: Sixteen subjects completed both days, 7 completed 1 day. Time to first effect was 13.1 min PO versus 6.6 min SL (p = 0.069), time to meaningful pain relief was 29.4 min PO versus 10.8 min SL (p = 0.02). Pain scores were not significantly different at all time points post-treatment. Satisfaction and GIC scores were similar for both groups. Overall, adverse events occurred more often with SL administration (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Sublingual administration of ketamine led to a faster onset of pain relief (but also a higher adverse event rate), but in all other aspects treatment with ketamine given sublingually and orally produced similar analgesic effects. ACTRN: ACTRN12621000240842, 08/03/2021, retrospectively registered.
Authors: Steven P Cohen; Anuj Bhatia; Asokumar Buvanendran; Eric S Schwenk; Ajay D Wasan; Robert W Hurley; Eugene R Viscusi; Samer Narouze; Fred N Davis; Elspeth C Ritchie; Timothy R Lubenow; William M Hooten Journal: Reg Anesth Pain Med Date: 2018-07 Impact factor: 6.288