Murphy Jamie D, Yan Dawn, Hanna Marie N, Bravos E David, Isaac Gillian R, Eng Calvin A, Wu Christopher L
Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
J Opioid Manag. 2010 Mar-Apr;6(2):141-7. doi: 10.5055/jom.2010.0014.
Intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV PCA) with tramadol is an accepted method to deliver postoperative analgesia outside North America; however, the analgesic efficacy of this analgesic agent when compared with IVPCA with opioids is uncertain. As such, the authors undertook a systematic review to compare the analgesic efficacy of IVPCA tramadol with that of IVPCA with opioids.
The authors used the National Library of Medicine's Medline database to search for terms related to tramadol and patient-controlled analgesia. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing IVPCA tramadol with IVPCA opioid and RCTs published in the English language. Relevant data were abstracted from accepted studies. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 4.2.10 (The Cochrane Collaboration, 2004). A random effects model was used.
A total of 190 abstracts were obtained from the above search, and a total of 12 RCTs met the above inclusion criteria. There was no difference in weighted visual analog scale pain scores between IVPCA tramadol versus IVPCA opioid at 48 hours postoperatively or risk of sedation or fatigue. IVPCA tramadol was associated with a higher odds of postoperative nausea and vomiting [odds ratio (OR) = 1.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.07-2.14) but a lower odds of pruritus (OR = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.19-0.98).
IVPCA tramadol appears to produce similar pain scores when compared with that from IVPCA opioids; however, the side effect profile is different between the two groups. Because of the relatively small sample size, no determination of the relative "safety" (eg, respiratory depression) of one regimen over the other can be made, and larger RCTs would be needed for such a determination.
在北美以外地区,曲马多静脉自控镇痛(IV PCA)是一种公认的术后镇痛方法;然而,与阿片类药物静脉自控镇痛相比,这种镇痛剂的镇痛效果尚不确定。因此,作者进行了一项系统评价,以比较曲马多静脉自控镇痛与阿片类药物静脉自控镇痛的镇痛效果。
作者使用美国国立医学图书馆的Medline数据库搜索与曲马多和自控镇痛相关的术语。纳入标准为比较曲马多静脉自控镇痛与阿片类药物静脉自控镇痛的随机对照试验(RCT)以及以英文发表的RCT。从纳入的研究中提取相关数据。使用RevMan 4.2.10(Cochrane协作网,2004年)进行荟萃分析。采用随机效应模型。
通过上述搜索共获得190篇摘要,共有12项RCT符合上述纳入标准。术后48小时,曲马多静脉自控镇痛与阿片类药物静脉自控镇痛的加权视觉模拟量表疼痛评分、镇静或疲劳风险无差异。曲马多静脉自控镇痛与术后恶心呕吐的较高发生率相关[比值比(OR)=1.52,95%置信区间(CI)=1.07 - 2.14],但瘙痒发生率较低(OR = 0.43,95% CI = 0.19 - 0.98)。
与阿片类药物静脉自控镇痛相比,曲马多静脉自控镇痛似乎能产生相似的疼痛评分;然而,两组的副作用情况不同。由于样本量相对较小,无法确定一种方案相对于另一种方案的相对“安全性”(如呼吸抑制),需要更大规模的RCT来进行此类确定。