Skip to main content
PMC home page
Current Therapeutic Research, Clinical and Experimental logoLink to Current Therapeutic Research, Clinical and Experimental
. 2005 Jul;66(4):294–306. doi: 10.1016/j.curtheres.2005.08.007

Effects of single-dose injectable paracetamolversus propacetamol in pain management after minor gynecologic surgery: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, two-parallel-group study*

Jean Marty 1, Dan Benhamou 2, Dominique Chassard 3, Nicole Emperaire 4, Alain Roche 5, Annick Mayaud 6, Dominique Haro 7, Xavier Baron 8, Odile Hiesse-Provost 9,**
PMCID: PMC4052630  PMID: 24936118

Abstract

Background:

Intravenous administration is the route of choice for drug therapy in the immediate postoperative period. Propacetamol (ProAPAP), an injectable prodrug of paracetamol requiring reconstitution, has demonstrated efficacy in managing acute pain and fever. However, it has been associated with pain at the injection site. A stable, ready-to-use formulation of paracetamol solution infused intravenously (IV-APAP) has been developed and might be associated with less pain at the injection site compared with ProAPAR

Objective:

The objective of this study was to assess the tolerability and efficacy of a single dose of IV APAP 1 g compared with those of a single dose of ProAPAP 2 g in patients with moderate to severe pain after minor gynecologic surgery.

Methods:

This single-dose, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled,2-parallel-group study was conducted at 23 hospitals and outpatient clinics in France. After minor gynecologic surgery, patients reporting moderate to severe pain were randomized to receive a single 15-minute infusion of IV-APAP 1 g or ProAPAP 2 g (bioeyuivalent doses). Tolerability was monitored using local and systemic adverse event (AE) reporting, clinical examination including vital sign measurement, and patients' ratings of acceptability of the infusion. Efficacy end points included pain intensity at 0, 1, 2, 4, and 6 hours; median time to rescue medication (defined as the time at which 50% of patients requested rescue medication); and percentage of patients requesting rescue medication. Patients' satisfaction with the study drugs was assessed using patient's global evaluation (PGE) and the percentage of patients willing to receive the treatment again.

Results:

Of the 163 women who were randomized, 161 received the studymedication. The IV-APAP group comprised 80 patients (mean [SD] age, 38.3 [12.8] years [range, 18.0-69.0 years]; mean [SD] weight, 61.1 [11.0] kg [range, 49.0–90.0 kg]), and the ProAPAP group comprised 81 patients (mean [SD] age, 33.9 [12.0] years [range, 18.0–67.0 years]; mean [SD] weight, 61.6 [10.2] kg [range, 42.0–95.5 kg]); the difference in mean age between the 2 groups was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The incidence of local treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) was significantly lower in the IV-APAP group compared with that in the ProAPAP group (7.5% vs 38.3%; P < 0.001). No between-group differences in the incidence of systemic TEAEs was found. All patients in the IV-APAP group found the infusion tolerable, compared with 95% of patients in the ProAPAP group. The median time to rescue medication was not evaluated because <50% of the patients in each group requested it. No significant differences in mean pain intensity score or percentage of patients requesting rescue medication were found between the 2 groups at any time point. The percentages of patients in the IV-APAP and ProAPAP groups who rated the study medication as good or excellent on the PGE (83.6% vs 75.6%; P < 0.05) and who were willing to receive the same treatment again (96.0% vs 81.0%; P = 0.005) were significantly higher with IV-APAP compared with ProAPAP

Conclusion:

In these patients with moderate to severe pain after minor gynecologic surgery, a single dose of IV-APAP was associated with better local tolerability, similar analgesic efficacy, and greater patient satisfaction compared with a single bioequivalent dose of ProAPAP.

Key words: paracetamol, propacetamol, intravenous, acetaminophen, post-surgical pain management, gynecologic surgery

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (679.5 KB).

Footnotes

*

This study was presented in part in poster format the 45th Congress of the Société Française d'AnesthésieRéanimation, Paris, France, 2003.

References

  • 1.Schmitt E., Vainchtock A., Nicoloyannis N. Ready-to-use injectable paracetamol: Easier, safer, lowering workload and cost. Eur J Hosp Pharm. 2003;9:96–102. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Zhou T.J., Tang J., White P.F. Propacetamol versus ketorolac for treatment of acute postoperative pain after total hip or knee replacement. Anesth Analg. 2001;92:1569–1575. doi: 10.1097/00000539-200106000-00044. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Flouvat B., Leneveu A., Fitoussi S. Bioequivalence study comparing a new paracetamol solution for injection and propacetamol after single intravenous infusion in healthy subjects. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2004;42:50–57. doi: 10.5414/cpp42050. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Moller P.L., Juhl G.I., Payen-Champenois C., Skoglund L.A. IV acetaminophen (paracetamol): Comparable analgesic efficacy, but better local safety than its prodrug, propa cetamol, for postoperative pain after third molar surgery. Anesth Analg. 2005;101:90–96. doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000155297.47955.D6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Sinatra R.S., Jahr J.S., Reynolds L.W. Efficacy and safety of single and repeated administration of 1 gram intravenous acetaminophen injection (paracetamol) for pain management aftermajor orthopedic surgery. Anesthesiology. 2005;102:822–831. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200504000-00019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Murat I., Baujard C., Foussat C. Tolerability and analgesic efficacy of a new i.v. paracetamol solution in children after inguinal hernia repair. Pediatr Anaesth. 2005;15:663–670. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9592.2004.01518.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products . International Conference on Harmonisation-World Health Organization. EMEA; London, United Kingdom: 2002. http://www.emea.eu.int (Guideline for Good Clinical Practice). ICH Topic E6 [EMEA Web site] Accessed June 21, 2005. Accessed June 21, 2005. Accessed June 21, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Recommendations Guiding Medical Doctors in Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects. WMA; Ferney-Voltaire, France: 1989. http://www.wma.net Accessed June 21, 2005. Accessed June 21, 2005. Accessed June 21, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  • 9.American Society of Anesthesiologists ASA Physical Status Classification System. 2005. http://www.asahq.org/clinical/physicalstatus.htm [ASA Web site]. Available at: Accessed June 21.
  • 10.Cox D.R., Oakes D. Chapman and Hall; New York, NY: 1984. Analysis of Survival Data. [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Jarde O., Boccard E. Parenteral versus oral route increases paracetamol efficacy. Clin Drug Invest. 1997;14:474–481. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Van Aken H., Thys L., Veekman L., Buerkle H. Assessing analgesia in single and repeated administrations of propacetamol for postoperative pain: Comparison with morphine after dental surgery. Anesth Analg. 2004;98:159–165. doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000093312.72011.59. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.EuroPain Task Force . Pegasus Healthcare International, Ltd; Montreal, Quebec, Canada: 1998. European minimum standards for the management of post-operative pain. September. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Sheen C.L., Dillon J.F., Bateman D.N. Paracetamol toxicity: Epidemiology, prevention and costs to the health-care system. QJM. 2002;95:609–619. doi: 10.1093/qjmed/95.9.609. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Haas D.A. An update on analgesics for the management of acute postoperative dental pain. J Can Dent Assoc. 2002;68:476–482. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Patel N.Y., Landercasper J. Ketorolac-induced postoperative acute renal failure: A case report. Wis Med J. 1995;94:445–447. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Strom B.L., Berlin J.A., Kinman J.L. Parenteral ketorolac and risk of gastrointestinal and operative site bleeding. A postmarketing surveillance study. JAMA. 1996;275:376–382. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.RuDusky B.M. Severe postoperative hemorrhage attributed to single-dose parenteral ketorolac-induced coagulopathy. Angiology. 2000;51:999–1002. doi: 10.1177/000331970005101203. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Wright J.M. The double-edged sword of COX-2 selective NSAIDs. CMAJ. 2002;167:1131–1137. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Toes M.J., Jones A.L., Prescott L. Drug interactions with paracetamol. Am J Ther. 2005;12:56–66. doi: 10.1097/00045391-200501000-00009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Current Therapeutic Research, Clinical and Experimental are provided here courtesy of Elsevier

RESOURCES