Efficacy and safety of oliceridine treatment in patients with postoperative pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

ABSTRACT

Aim

Our aim was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the efficacy and safety of oliceridine in patients with postoperative pain.

Methods

Four databases were searched from the beginning of the database to the present. We included all randomized controlled trials (RCT) that evaluated the efficacy and safety of oliceridine in patients with postoperative pain. Our endpoints were the proportion of treatment responders to the oliceridine regimen and the incidence of adverse effects such as nausea and vomiting.

Results

The analysis showed that more patients responded significantly with oliceridine compared to placebo. The proportion of treatment responders to oliceridine was comparable to that of morphine. Oliceridine had analgesia effects similar to morphine compared to placebo. The incidence of respiratory safety events was significantly lower with oliceridine compared to morphine. Oliceridine was significantly associated with more adverse events such as nausea and vomiting compared to placebo. The safety profile of oliceridine was superior to morphine compared to morphine.

Conclusions

Our systematic review and meta-analysis showed that oliceridine is an effective and safe intravenous analgesic in patients with postoperative pain, producing rapid postoperative analgesic and usually well tolerated, and reducing incidence of adverse events compared to morphine.

PROSPERO registration

CRD42023391581

KEYWORDS:

• Oliceridine
• Postoperative analgesia
• Morphine
• Opioid abuse
• Efficacy
• Safety

Declaration of interest

The authors have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties.

Reviewer disclosures

A reviewer on this manuscript has disclosed that their university has had a contract with Trevena to perform a cost effectiveness analysis of oliceridine compared to morphine, which has resulted in published papers on which they are lead author. They have not personally received any payments for this work. Peer reviewers on this manuscript have no other relevant financial relationships or otherwise to disclose.

Author contributions

J Niu completed the study design and data analysis and wrote the manuscript, W Hu collected the data, Y Lu proofread all drafts, and H Tang provided guidance on the paper. All authors contributed to the writing and revision of the article and have some constructive comments and suggestions for improvement of the paper. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of the study are included within the article and its additional files.

Supplemental data

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/17512433.2023.2213889.

Additional information

Funding

This paper was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (82102372) and Shandong Provincial Natural Science Fundation (No. ZR2020MC060)