Oral sucrose as an analgesic drug for procedural pain in newborn infants: a randomised controlled trial.
BACKGROUND
Many infants admitted to hospital undergo repeated invasive procedures. Oral sucrose is frequently given to relieve procedural pain in neonates on the basis of its effect on behavioural and physiological pain scores. We assessed whether sucrose administration reduces pain-specific brain and spinal cord activity after an acute noxious procedure in newborn infants.


METHODS
In this double-blind, randomised controlled trial, 59 newborn infants at University College Hospital (London, UK) were randomly assigned to receive 0·5 mL 24% sucrose solution or 0·5 mL sterile water 2 min before undergoing a clinically required heel lance. Randomisation was by a computer-generated randomisation code, and researchers, clinicians, participants, and parents were masked to the identity of the solutions. The primary outcome was pain-specific brain activity evoked by one time-locked heel lance, recorded with electroencephalography and identified by principal component analysis. Secondary measures were baseline behavioural and physiological measures, observational pain scores (PIPP), and spinal nociceptive reflex withdrawal activity. Data were analysed per protocol. This study is registered, number ISRCTN78390996.


RESULTS
29 infants were assigned to receive sucrose and 30 to sterilised water; 20 and 24 infants, respectively, were included in the analysis of the primary outcome measure. Nociceptive brain activity after the noxious heel lance did not differ significantly between infants who received sucrose and those who received sterile water (sucrose: mean 0·10, 95% CI 0·04-0·16; sterile water: mean 0·08, 0·04-0·12; p=0·46). No significant difference was recorded between the sucrose and sterile water groups in the magnitude or latency of the spinal nociceptive reflex withdrawal recorded from the biceps femoris of the stimulated leg. The PIPP score was significantly lower in infants given sucrose than in those given sterile water (mean 5·8, 95% CI 3·7-7·8 vs 8·5, 7·3-9·8; p=0·02) and significantly more infants had no change in facial expression after sucrose administration (seven of 20 [35%] vs none of 24; p<0·0001).


CONCLUSIONS
Our data suggest that oral sucrose does not significantly affect activity in neonatal brain or spinal cord nociceptive circuits, and therefore might not be an effective analgesic drug. The ability of sucrose to reduce clinical observational scores after noxious events in newborn infants should not be interpreted as pain relief.


BACKGROUND
Medical Research Council.
Slater
Rebeccah
R
Nuffield Department of Anaesthetics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. r.slater@ucl.ac.uk
Cornelissen
Laura
L
Fabrizi
Lorenzo
L
Patten
Debbie
D
Yoxen
Jan
J
Worley
Alan
A
Boyd
Stewart
S
Meek
Judith
J
Fitzgerald
Maria
M
D000284:Administration, Oral; D000698:Analgesia; D001800:Blood Specimen Collection; D001921:Brain / Q000502:physiology; D004311:Double-Blind Method; D004569:Electroencephalography; D004576:Electromyography; D005071:Evoked Potentials; D005149:Facial Expression; D005260:Female; D006339:Heart Rate; D006801:Humans; D018730:Infant Behavior; D007231:Infant, Newborn; D008297:Male; D010100:Oxygen / Q000097:blood; D010147:Pain Measurement; D013131:Spine / Q000502:physiology; D013395:Sucrose / Q000008:administration & dosage*; D014867:Water / Q000008:administration & dosage
D014867:Water; D013395:Sucrose; D010100:Oxygen
Pediatrics. 2010 May;125(5):1042-7
20403938
Pain Res Manag. 2009 Jan-Feb;14(1):53-8
19262917
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Jan 20;(1):CD001069
20091512
Brain Res. 1985 Apr 1;331(1):105-14
3986554
Clin J Pain. 1996 Mar;12(1):13-22
8722730
J Neurosci. 2009 Jun 17;29(24):7909-16
19535602
Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2010 Apr;34(4):681-92
20121718
JAMA. 2008 Jul 2;300(1):60-70
18594041
Neuroscience. 2005;133(1):231-43
15893646
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2003 Nov;157(11):1058-64
14609893
Pain. 2006 Dec 5;125(3):278-285
17011707
Eur J Pain. 2010 Mar;14(3):321-6
19481484
Pain. 2004 Jun;109(3):507-513
15157713
Pediatrics. 2009 Mar;123(3):e425-9
19254979
Eur J Pain. 2010 Feb;14(2):222-5
19477145
JAMA. 2003 Nov 12;290(18):2419-27
14612478
Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1997 Nov;104(6):514-21
9402893
Eur J Pain. 2009 Jan;13(1):94-101
18439861
BMC Anesthesiol. 2008 Dec 17;8:8
19091117
Dev Med Child Neurol. 1999 Oct;41(10):696-703
10587047
Crit Care Med. 2004 Feb;32(2):421-7
14758158
Clin Ther. 2005 Jun;27(6):814-43
16117988
Nat Clin Pract Neurol. 2009 Jan;5(1):35-50
19129789
Pain. 2009 Nov;146(1-2):177-82
19682794
Pediatrics. 2002 Sep;110(3):570-6
12205262
Pain. 2010 Aug;150(2):257-267
20471751
Br J Anaesth. 2008 Jul;101(1):101-10
18430745
PLoS Med. 2008 Jun 24;5(6):e129
18578562
J Neurosci. 2009 Oct 14;29(41):13053-62
19828818
Pain. 2009 Jul;144(1-2):9
19375223
Neuroimage. 2010 Aug 15;52(2):583-9
20438855
Prog Neurobiol. 2005 Dec;77(6):353-95
16386347
Semin Perinatol. 2007 Oct;31(5):283-8
17905182
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2001 Feb;155(2):173-80
11177093