Kreisler Rachael E, Cornell Heather N, Smith Veronica A, Kelsey Samantha E, Hofmeister Erik H
Department of Pathology and Population Medicine, Animal Health Institute, College of Veterinary Medicine, Midwestern University, Glendale, AZ, USA.
College of Veterinary Medicine, Midwestern University, Glendale, AZ, USA.
J Feline Med Surg. 2020 Feb;22(2):100-107. doi: 10.1177/1098612X19826715. Epub 2019 Feb 8.
The goal of this study was to determine whether a drug combination using nalbuphine with dexmedetomidine and tiletamine/zolazepam is non-inferior to one that uses butorphanol.
All healthy cats presenting solely for gonadectomy to two trap-neuter-return mobile clinic days were randomly assigned to induction with a combination of tiletamine/zolazepam 3 mg/kg, dexmedetomidine 7.5 µg/kg and either butorphanol or nalbuphine at 0.15 mg/kg. All participants were blinded to the identity of the combinations. The primary endpoint was clinician satisfaction, comprised of the mean of four satisfaction ratings on a 7-point Likert scale (highly dissatisfied through to highly satisfied) recorded for induction, maintenance of anesthesia, surgery and recovery. Exploratory endpoints included each individual score, number of injections, duration of induction, duration of recovery and need for reversal agent. To assess non-inferiority for the primary endpoint and individual scores, the difference and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the difference between the mean clinical scores for the nalbuphine and butorphanol-based combinations were calculated and compared with a prespecified non-inferiority margin of 20% (1.4 points).
Seventy-two cats were enrolled, 36 in each group. The mean ± SD composite score for the combination with nalbuphine was 6.06 ± 0.59 (95% CI 5.86-6.25) points, while the combination with butorphanol was 6.22 ± 0.62 (95% CI 6.01-6.43). The difference between mean scores was 0.17 (-0.12 to 0.45), which did not exceed the prespecified boundary of 1.4, establishing the non-inferiority of nalbuphine. No individual clinical score for nalbuphine was inferior to butorphanol, and there were no significant differences for any secondary endpoints.
The clinical experience of the nalbuphine-based combination was non-inferior to the butorphanol-based combination. Nalbuphine is an effective substitute for butorphanol, providing another option if butorphanol is unavailable due to shortage, controlled status or cost, without requiring a change in anesthetic workflow.
本研究的目的是确定纳布啡与右美托咪定及替来他明/唑拉西泮联合用药是否不劣于使用布托啡诺的联合用药。
所有仅因去势手术前来两家诱捕-绝育-放归流动诊所就诊的健康猫,被随机分配接受由3 mg/kg替来他明/唑拉西泮、7.5 μg/kg右美托咪定与0.15 mg/kg布托啡诺或纳布啡组成的联合诱导用药。所有参与者均对联合用药的种类不知情。主要终点为临床医生满意度,由诱导期、麻醉维持期、手术期及恢复期记录的7分李克特量表(从极不满意到极满意)上的四个满意度评分的平均值组成。探索性终点包括各个单项评分、注射次数、诱导持续时间、恢复持续时间及是否需要使用逆转剂。为评估主要终点及各个单项评分的非劣效性,计算了基于纳布啡和布托啡诺的联合用药的平均临床评分之间的差值及差值的95%置信区间(CI),并与预先设定的20%(1.4分)的非劣效界值进行比较。
共纳入72只猫,每组36只。基于纳布啡的联合用药的平均±标准差综合评分为6.06±0.59(95%CI 5.86 - 6.25)分,而基于布托啡诺的联合用药为6.22±0.62(95%CI 6.01 - 6.43)分。平均评分差值为0.17(-0.12至0.45),未超过预先设定的1.4分的界值,确立了纳布啡的非劣效性。纳布啡的任何单项临床评分均不低于布托啡诺,且任何次要终点均无显著差异。
基于纳布啡的联合用药的临床体验不劣于基于布托啡诺的联合用药。纳布啡是布托啡诺的有效替代药物,在因短缺、管控状态或成本原因无法获得布托啡诺时提供了另一种选择,且无需改变麻醉工作流程。