MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4405047598 · doi:10.1182/blood-2024-202145

Feasibility, Safety and Effectiveness of Intranasal Fentanyl in the Treatment of Acute Pain Episodes Among Adults with Sickle Cell Disease: A Retrospective Single Center Study

2024· article· en· W4405047598 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Lauren Arena, J. A. Colin Bergeron, Bernard Lemieux, Jules M. Ross, Nazila Bettache, Denis Soulières, Stéphanie Forté

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiquePharmacological Effects and Toxicity Studies
Établissements canadiensCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalUniversité de Montréal
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineFentanylSingle CenterRetrospective cohort studyNasal administrationAcute painSickle cell anemiaDiseaseAnesthesiaSurgeryInternal medicinePharmacology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Introduction: The management of acute moderate to severe pain episodes (APE) in patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) involves the rapid administration of opioid analgesia within 60 minutes of presentation, as recommended by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, and the American Society of Hematology. Intranasal fentanyl (INF) is therefore an appealing option for its non-invasive administration, bypassing the need for IV access, as well as for its rapid onset of action (<10 min). The use of INF has been widely adopted in the pediatric SCD population, where it has been associated with more rapid administration of analgesia and early discharge from the ED. Despite this, there is currently a paucity of evidence to support its use in adults with SCD. Since 2020, the CHUM (Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal) has instituted a standardized INF protocol for the management of patients with severe non-complicated APE referred to the medical day hospital (MDH). Objective: The aim of this study is to describe the feasibility, safety and effectiveness of INF in managing APE in adults with SCD at our center. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted at the CHUM (Montréal, Canada), a tertiary care center treating 586 patients with SCD. An administrative list was used to identify patients with at least one visit to the MDH for management of APE between March 2020 and June 2024, and patients who were managed with INF were identified. Electronic medical records were accessed to extract patient characteristics, variables pertaining to the process (time to first dose of analgesia, duration of stay in MDH), safety (respiratory depression, hypotension, or bradycardia) and effectiveness (serial pain scores and admission rate). Results: Between March 2020 and June 2024, 23 patients with SCD were treated with INF in the MDH over a total of 38 visits. INF was administered as a fixed dose of 100 mcg, via a Mucosal Atomizer Device. Seventeen (74%) patients were female, and the median age at presentation was 26 years (range: 18-58). Genotype distribution was as follows: 15 (66%) of patients with HbSS, 5 (21%) with HbSC, and 3 (13%) with HbSβ+. Twenty (86%) patients were receiving treatment with hydroxyurea, and 5 (21%) were undergoing regular erythrapheresis. Virtually all patients had previous exposure to opioids, and 3 (13%) patients had chronic exposure to long-acting opioids. On presentation, all patients received co-analgesia with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and all received subsequent doses of parenteral opioids, with a median dose of 12.5 mg (5-50 mg) morphine equivalents. The median time to administration of INF from presentation was 48 minutes (10-125 min). The median duration of stay in MDH was 4 hours (1.5-6.7 hours). No patients experienced cardiorespiratory adverse events, nor alterations in mental status. The most common side effects reported were nausea and pruritus resulting in the administration of antiemetics or antihistamines in 7 (18%) and 4 (10%) of visits, respectively. The median pain score on presentation was 7 (4-10) and pain scores at 1 hour after INF and at discharge from MDH were 6 (1-8) and 3 (0-8), respectively. This represented a median 60% (0-100%) reduction in pain score at the time of discharge and only 4 (11%) visits resulted in hospital admission due to inadequate pain control. Ten patients (43%) had more than 1visit during the observation period, and 50% of these patients received INF again on their subsequent visits. Conclusion: To our knowledge, this is the first study reporting on the use of INF in adults with SCD in a MDH setting. In this small cohort, INF appeared to be feasible, safe, and effective in the management of APE in adults with SCD presenting to the MDH and was acceptable among patients. Administration of INF was rapid, respecting recommended delays, and very few visits required admission or ED referral for additional analgesia. The use of INF has been widely accepted in the pediatric population with SCD and it has been shown to be effective in adults with chronic and cancer related pain. Standardized protocols which incorporate INF should therefore be considered in the management of adults with SCD, and further research on its relative effectiveness compared to traditional parenteral routes of administration, as well as patient preferences, are needed.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,013
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,025

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,007
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,011
Tête enseignante GPT0,277
Écart entre enseignants0,265 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2024
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetPharmacological Effects and Toxicity StudiesTravaux en français237 207