在一项前瞻性、随机、盲评的非劣效性临床试验中，比较格拉普兰特与罗贝纳考昔在猫进行选择性卵巢子宫切除术中的镇痛效果
摘要来源：
https://doi.org/10.1177/1098612X241230941
译员：深蓝猫猫侠
一校：郭嘉恩
二校：kenda
编辑：百可事乐
摘要
目的
本研究的主要目标是比较格拉普兰特与罗贝纳考昔在猫行卵巢子宫切除术（OVH）后的镇痛效果。
方法
共有37只雌性猫（年龄范围4个月至10岁，体重≥2.5kg）参与了一项前瞻性、随机、盲评的非劣效（NI）临床试验。猫在OVH前2小时口服罗贝纳考昔（1mg/kg）或格拉普兰特（2mg/kg）。在给药前2小时、拔管时以及拔管后2、4、6、8、18和24小时，通过猫面部综合评分（FGS）、格拉斯哥综合测量疼痛量表-猫（CMPS-F）、Von Frey纤毛机械刺激针（vFFs）和压力测痛仪（ALG）评估镇痛效果。对CMPS-F得分≥5/20和/或FGS得分≥4/10的猫在术后8小时内给予氢吗啡酮，或在术后18小时给予丁丙诺啡。CMPS-F和vFFs的NI边界分别设定为3和-0.2。使用混合效应ANOVA对FGS得分进行分析（P<0.05）。数据以平均值±SEM报告。
结果
分析了33只猫的数据。CMPS-F的95%置信区间（CI）上限（0.35）小于NI边界3，vFFs的95%CI下限（0.055）大于NI边界-0.2，表明格拉普兰特的非劣效性。两种治疗拔管时的FGS得分均高于基线（1.65±0.63；P=0.001），但两种治疗之间无差异。对于vFFs，两种治疗之间也无差异，且无治疗与时间的交互作用（P<0.001）。两种治疗的CMPS-F得分在拔管时较高，但在4小时后回到基线（P<0.001）。对于ALG，治疗之间及治疗与时间的交互作用均无差异。罗贝纳考昔组在拔管和术后6小时的压力读数比基线低。
结论与相关性
这些结果表明，对于通过腹中线切开术进行OVH的猫，格拉普兰特的术后疼痛效果不劣于罗贝纳考昔。格拉普兰特用于通过侧腹切口进行OVH的镇痛效果尚不明确。
原文：
Evaluation of the analgesic efficacy of grapiprant compared with robenacoxib in cats undergoing elective ovariohysterectomy in a prospective, randomized, masked, non-inferiority clinical trial
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.
