Evaluation of the analgesic efficacy of grapiprant compared with robenacoxib in cats undergoing elective ovariohysterectomy in a prospective, randomized, masked, non-inferiority clinical trial.
Elizabeth K Pisack, Stephanie A Kleine, Chiara E Hampton, Christopher K Smith, Jennifer Weisent, Rebecca DeBolt, Cambrie Schumacher, Genevieve Bussières, Reza Seddighi
{"title":"Evaluation of the analgesic efficacy of grapiprant compared with robenacoxib in cats undergoing elective ovariohysterectomy in a prospective, randomized, masked, non-inferiority clinical trial.","authors":"Elizabeth K Pisack, Stephanie A Kleine, Chiara E Hampton, Christopher K Smith, Jennifer Weisent, Rebecca DeBolt, Cambrie Schumacher, Genevieve Bussières, Reza Seddighi","doi":"10.1177/1098612X241230941","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The main objective of this study was to compare the postoperative analgesic effects of grapiprant with those of robenacoxib in cats undergoing ovariohysterectomy (OVH).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In total, 37 female cats (age range 4 months-10 years, weighing ⩾2.5 kg) were enrolled in a prospective, randomized, masked, non-inferiority (NI) clinical trial. Cats received oral robenacoxib (1 mg/kg) or grapiprant (2 mg/kg) 2 h before OVH. Analgesia was assessed via the Feline Grimace Scale (FGS), the Glasgow Composite Measure Pain Scale-Feline (CMPS-F), von Frey monofilaments (vFFs) and pressure algometry (ALG) 2 h before treatment administration, at extubation, and 2, 4, 6, 8, 18 and 24 hours after extubation. Hydromorphone (<8 h postoperatively) or buprenorphine (>18 h postoperatively) were administered to cats with scores of ⩾5/20 on CMPS-F and/or ⩾4/10 on FGS. NI margins for CMPS-F and vFFs were set at 3 and -0.2, respectively. A mixed-effect ANOVA was used for FGS scores (<i>P</i> <0.05). Data are reported as mean ± SEM.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The data from 33 cats were analyzed. The upper limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.35) was less than the NI margin of 3 for CMPS-F, and the lower limit of the 95% CI (0.055) was greater than the NI margin of -0.2 for vFFs, indicating NI of grapiprant. The FGS scores were greater than baseline at extubation for both treatments (1.65 ± 0.63; <i>P</i> = 0.001); however, there was no difference between treatments. There was no difference between treatments, nor treatment by time interaction, for vFFs (<i>P</i> <0.001). The CMPS-F scores for both treatments were higher at extubation but returned to baseline after 4 h (<i>P</i> <0.001). For ALG, there was no difference in treatment or treatment by time interaction. The robenacoxib group had lower pressure readings at extubation and 6 h compared with baseline.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>These results indicate that grapiprant was non-inferior to robenacoxib for mitigating postsurgical pain in cats after OVH performed via ventral celiotomy. The impact of grapiprant for analgesia in OVH via the flank is unknown.</p>","PeriodicalId":15851,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Feline Medicine and Surgery","volume":"26 3","pages":"1098612X241230941"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10983605/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Feline Medicine and Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1098612X241230941","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: The main objective of this study was to compare the postoperative analgesic effects of grapiprant with those of robenacoxib in cats undergoing ovariohysterectomy (OVH).
Methods: In total, 37 female cats (age range 4 months-10 years, weighing ⩾2.5 kg) were enrolled in a prospective, randomized, masked, non-inferiority (NI) clinical trial. Cats received oral robenacoxib (1 mg/kg) or grapiprant (2 mg/kg) 2 h before OVH. Analgesia was assessed via the Feline Grimace Scale (FGS), the Glasgow Composite Measure Pain Scale-Feline (CMPS-F), von Frey monofilaments (vFFs) and pressure algometry (ALG) 2 h before treatment administration, at extubation, and 2, 4, 6, 8, 18 and 24 hours after extubation. Hydromorphone (<8 h postoperatively) or buprenorphine (>18 h postoperatively) were administered to cats with scores of ⩾5/20 on CMPS-F and/or ⩾4/10 on FGS. NI margins for CMPS-F and vFFs were set at 3 and -0.2, respectively. A mixed-effect ANOVA was used for FGS scores (P <0.05). Data are reported as mean ± SEM.
Results: The data from 33 cats were analyzed. The upper limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.35) was less than the NI margin of 3 for CMPS-F, and the lower limit of the 95% CI (0.055) was greater than the NI margin of -0.2 for vFFs, indicating NI of grapiprant. The FGS scores were greater than baseline at extubation for both treatments (1.65 ± 0.63; P = 0.001); however, there was no difference between treatments. There was no difference between treatments, nor treatment by time interaction, for vFFs (P <0.001). The CMPS-F scores for both treatments were higher at extubation but returned to baseline after 4 h (P <0.001). For ALG, there was no difference in treatment or treatment by time interaction. The robenacoxib group had lower pressure readings at extubation and 6 h compared with baseline.
Conclusions and relevance: These results indicate that grapiprant was non-inferior to robenacoxib for mitigating postsurgical pain in cats after OVH performed via ventral celiotomy. The impact of grapiprant for analgesia in OVH via the flank is unknown.
期刊介绍:
JFMS is an international, peer-reviewed journal aimed at both practitioners and researchers with an interest in the clinical veterinary healthcare of domestic cats. The journal is published monthly in two formats: ‘Classic’ editions containing high-quality original papers on all aspects of feline medicine and surgery, including basic research relevant to clinical practice; and dedicated ‘Clinical Practice’ editions primarily containing opinionated review articles providing state-of-the-art information for feline clinicians, along with other relevant articles such as consensus guidelines.