Abstract
Abstract
Introduction
This multi-centre randomised controlled trial evaluated the clinical and cost effectiveness of liposomal bupivacaine for pain and recovery following knee replacement.
Methodology
533patients undergoing primary knee replacement were randomised to receive either liposomal bupivacaine (266mg) plus bupivacaine hydrochloride (100mg) or control (bupivacaine hydrochloride 100mg), administered at the surgical site. The co-primary outcomes were pain visual analogue score (VAS) area under the curve (AUC) 6 to 72hours and the Quality of Recovery 40 (QoR-40) score at 72hours.
Results
Primary analysis found no difference in pain VAS AUC 6 to 72hours between liposomal bupivacaine and control (MD -21.5 (97.5% CI -46.8 to 3.8; p=0.057)), nor the QoR-40 at 72hours (MD 0.54, 97.5% CI -2.05 to 3.13, p=0.643). Analyses of pain VAS and QoR-40 scores on days 0, 1, 2 and 3 demonstrated only one significant difference, with the liposomal bupivacaine arm having lower pain scores the evening of surgery (day0; MD -0.54, 97.5% CI -1.07 to -0.02; p=0.021). No difference in cumulative opioid consumption or functional outcome at 6weeks, 6months or 1year was detected. Heath economic analysis found liposomal bupivacaine to be less effective in terms of QALYs as well as more costly. No difference in adverse events between arms was identified.
Conclusion
This is the largest RCT evaluating the clinical and cost effectiveness of liposomal bupivacaine It found that compared to bupivacaine hydrochloride local infiltration of liposomal bupivacaine at the surgical site does not provide any clinical or cost benefit for knee replacement and therefore should not be routinely used.
