Research AppraisalSystematic Review

The safety and efficacy of perioperative nefopam for analgesia in spine surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Neurosurgical reviewOsunronbi, Temidayo, Okechukwu, Hannah, Adeyeye, Elizabeth et al.22 May 2026DOI

Clinical Snapshot

85CEBM
Evidence: ModerateSystematic Review

PICO Framework

P — PopulationAdult patients undergoing spine surgery
I — InterventionPerioperative nefopam administration
C — ComparatorStandard care or placebo
O — Outcomes24-hour morphine consumption, pain scores (incisional and neuropathic), length of stay, adverse events

Bottom Line

This systematic review of seven RCTs (n=553) found that perioperative nefopam did not significantly reduce 24-hour morphine consumption, pain scores, or hospital length of stay in spine surgery patients. The evidence quality ranged from very low to moderate using GRADE criteria. Importantly, most included studies used nefopam doses below the median effective dose, which limits the validity of conclusions about its true efficacy and safety profile. While nefopam showed no increase in adverse events compared to controls, the current evidence does not support its routine use as an opioid-sparing agent in spine surgery. Future research should focus on dose-response relationships and optimal administration protocols before definitive recommendations can be made.

Evidence: Moderate

Key Findings

  • P Value: Not significant

  • Effect Size: MD -1.47 mg

  • Primary Outcome: 24-hour morphine consumption

  • Nnt Or Sensitivity: No clinically meaningful reduction in opioid consumption

  • Confidence Interval: 95% CI: -3.86 to 0.92 mg

Clinical Application

Limited by suboptimal dosing in most studies and lack of clear benefit over standard care Nefopam available on PBS for specific indications; results suggest limited evidence for routine use in spine surgery without dose optimisation studies Adult patients undergoing spine surgery requiring multimodal analgesia

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Moderate-to-severe pain is common after spine surgery. While opioids remain standard analgesia, their adverse effects have prompted opioid-sparing strategies. This systematic review evaluates the safety and efficacy of nefopam, a non-opioid and non-NSAID, as adjuvant perioperative analgesia in spine surgery. METHODS: Medline, Embase, Scopus and Cochrane databases were searched from inception to May 9, 2025. RevMan V5.4 was used to analyse mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RR) with 95% CIs for dichotomous outcomes. The GRADE framework was used to assess the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: Seven randomised controlled trials (n = 553) were included. Nefopam did not reduce 24-hour morphine use (MD -1.47 mg; 95% CI: -3.86 to 0.92 mg; GRADE moderate), 24-hour incisional pain (SMD, -0.01; 95% CI -0.22 to 0.20; GRADE moderate), 48-hour incisional pain (SMD, -0.24; 95% CI -0.50 to 0.02; GRADE low), 24-hour neuropathic pain (SMD, -0.19; 95% CI -0.49 to 0.10; GRADE low), 72-hour neuropathic pain (SMD, -0.33; 95% CI -1.02 to 0.36; GRADE very low), or length of stay (MD, 0.08days; 95% CI -0.73 to 0.88days; GRADE Low). There were no significant differences in drug-related adverse effects (sedation (RR 1.30), nausea/vomiting (RR 1.03), dizziness (RR 1.14), and urinary retention (RR 2.36)), (GRADE: very low to low). CONCLUSION: Perioperative nefopam did not reduce acute morphine use, pain scores, hospital stay, or drug-related adverse events in spine surgery, though most studies used doses below the median effective dose, limiting conclusions on its efficacy and safety.

References

  1. 1.Osunronbi, T., Okechukwu, H., Adeyeye, E., Abbou, Z., Mtemeri, J., & Karmi, Z. (2026). The safety and efficacy of perioperative nefopam for analgesia in spine surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Neurosurgical Review. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000542-200506000-00022
Share:XLinkedIn

This content is for educational purposes for healthcare professionals only and does not constitute clinical advice. Clinical decisions should be based on individual patient assessment, current guidelines, and appropriate specialist consultation. Editorial Standards · Privacy Policy · Terms of Service