Oral valdecoxib and injected parecoxib for acute postoperative pain: a quantitative systematic review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Barden J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC169173 | biostudies-literature | 2003 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Oral valdecoxib and injected parecoxib for acute postoperative pain: a quantitative systematic review.
Barden Jodie J Edwards Jayne E JE McQuay Henry J HJ Moore R Andrew RA
BMC anesthesiology 20030710 1
BACKGROUND: Clinical trials suggest that cyclo-oxygenase-2 specific inhibitors (coxibs) are an effective treatment for acute postoperative pain. The aims of this systematic review were to examine the evidence for oral valdecoxib and injected parecoxib, and quantify efficacy and adverse effects. METHODS: Information from randomized, double-blind studies in acute postoperative pain was sought. The area under the pain relief versus time curve over four to six hours was dichotomized using validated ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND: Naproxen and naproxen sodium are non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs used in a variety of painful conditions, including the treatment of postoperative pain. This review aims to assess the efficacy, safety and duration of action of a single oral dose of naproxen/naproxen sodium for moderate to severe acute postoperative pain in adults, compared with placebo. METHODS: The Cochrane Library (issue 4 2002), EMBASE, PubMed, MEDLINE and an in-house database were searched for randomised, double blind, placebo controlled trials of a single dose of orally administered naproxen or naproxen sodium in adults with acute postoperative pain. Pain relief or pain intensity data were extracted and converted into dichotomous information to give the number of patients with at least 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours. Relative benefit and number-needed-to-treat were then calculated. The percentage of patients with any adverse event, number-needed-to-harm, and time to remedication were also calculated. RESULTS: Ten trials with 996 patients in met the inclusion criteria. Six trials compared naproxen sodium 550 mg (252 patients) with placebo (248 patients); the NNT for at least 50% pain relief over six hours was 2.6 (95% confidence interval 2.2 to 3.2). There was no significant difference between the number of patients experiencing any adverse event on treatment compared with placebo. Weighted mean time to remedication was 7.6 hours for naproxen sodium 550 mg (206 patients) and 2.6 hours for placebo (205 patients). Four other trials used lower doses. CONCLUSION: A single oral dose of naproxen sodium 550 mg is an effective analgesic in the treatment of acute postoperative pain. A low incidence of adverse events was found, although these were not reported consistently.
| S-EPMC212403 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: Rofecoxib is a cyclo-oxygenase 2 selective inhibitor. This systematic review of rofecoxib in acute pain examined studies in adults of analgesic efficacy over six hours, the amount and quality of the evidence on extended duration of analgesia, and the quality and quantity of evidence on adverse events. METHODS: Cochrane Library (issue 4, 2001), Biological Abstracts (March 2002), MEDLINE (March 2002) and PubMed (March 2002) were searched using rofecoxib as a free text term. The area under the pain relief versus time curve was dichotomized using validated equations to derive the proportion of patients on rofecoxib 50 mg or placebo with at least 50% pain relief over six hours. This was used to calculate the number needed to treat for at least 50% pain relief over six hours for rofecoxib compared with placebo. Information on duration of analgesia and adverse events was also collected. RESULTS: Five included trials investigated 1,118 patients, of whom 211 received placebo and 464 received rofecoxib 50 mg. The NNT for rofecoxib 50 mg was 2.3 (95% confidence interval 2.0 to 2.6). The weighted mean remedication time was 1.9 hours for placebo (126 patients), 7.4 hours for ibuprofen 400 mg (97 patients) and 13.6 hours for rofecoxib 50 mg (322 patients). CONCLUSION: Rofecoxib at 2-4 times the standard daily dose for chronic pain is an effective single dose oral analgesic in acute pain. Limitations in trial reporting constrain conclusions about longer duration of analgesia and adverse event profile.
| S-EPMC116676 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectivesPostoperative pain is still a major concern in several surgical procedures. Multimodal analgesia is best for postoperative pain management; however, opioid therapy is still the main treatment for pain after surgical procedures. Transdermal buprenorphine is a partial μ agonist opioid widely used for chronic pain syndromes, with limited evidence for acute postoperative pain. A systematic review of studies examining transdermal buprenorphine for acute pain management after surgery was conducted.ContentsData from PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), CINAHL via EBSCOhost, and LILACS were reviewed, including randomized clinical trials that evaluated total postoperative pain, postoperative analgesic consumption, drug-related side effects and patient satisfaction with analgesia regimen. Data from nine studies (615 patients) were included in this review. Most studies initiated transdermal buprenorphine use 6 to 48 hours before surgery, maintaining use from 1 to 8 days after the procedure. Most studies showed lower or similar postoperative pain scores, postoperative analgesic consumption and patient satisfaction comparing buprenorphine to placebo, tramadol, celecoxib, flurbiprofen and parecoxib. The incidence of side effects varied between studies, with most showing no increase in drug-related side effects with buprenorphine use, except one study, which compared buprenorphine to oral tramadol, and one to transdermal fentanyl. However, most results were derived from evidence with an overall high or unclear risk of bias.ConclusionsAlthough more studies are necessary, initial results show that transdermal buprenorphine seems to be an effective and safe opioid choice for management of acute postoperative pain.
| S-EPMC9373428 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES:Inadequate postoperative pain control is common and is associated with poor clinical outcomes. This study aimed to identify preoperative predictors of poor postoperative pain control in adults undergoing inpatient surgery. DESIGN:Systematic review and meta-analysis DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO were searched through October 2017. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA:Studies in any language were included if they evaluated postoperative pain using a validated instrument in adults (≥18 years) and reported a measure of association between poor postoperative pain control (defined by study authors) and at least one preoperative predictor during the hospital stay. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS:Two reviewers screened articles, extracted data and assessed study quality. Measures of association for each preoperative predictor were pooled using random effects models. RESULTS:Thirty-three studies representing 53 362 patients were included in this review. Significant preoperative predictors of poor postoperative pain control included younger age (OR 1.18 [95% CI 1.05 to 1.32], number of studies, n=14), female sex (OR 1.29 [95% CI 1.17 to 1.43], n=20), smoking (OR 1.33 [95% CI 1.09 to 1.61], n=9), history of depressive symptoms (OR 1.71 [95% CI 1.32 to 2.22], n=8), history of anxiety symptoms (OR 1.22 [95% CI 1.09 to 1.36], n=10), sleep difficulties (OR 2.32 [95% CI 1.46 to 3.69], n=2), higher body mass index (OR 1.02 [95% CI 1.01 to 1.03], n=2), presence of preoperative pain (OR 1.21 [95% CI 1.10 to 1.32], n=13) and use of preoperative analgesia (OR 1.54 [95% CI 1.18 to 2.03], n=6). Pain catastrophising, American Society of Anesthesiologists status, chronic pain, marital status, socioeconomic status, education, surgical history, preoperative pressure pain tolerance and orthopaedic surgery (vs abdominal surgery) were not associated with increased odds of poor pain control. Study quality was generally high, although appropriate blinding of predictor during outcome ascertainment was often limited. CONCLUSIONS:Nine predictors of poor postoperative pain control were identified. These should be recognised as potentially important factors when developing discipline-specific clinical care pathways to improve pain outcomes and to guide future surgical pain research. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42017080682.
| S-EPMC6500309 | biostudies-other
Project description:IntroductionOrthopedic procedures have been associated with increased pain, making perioperative analgesia a major clinical concern. We assessed the efficacy and safety of intravenous parecoxib administration during the perioperative period for postoperative pain relief after orthopedic surgery in adults.MethodsPubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and clinicaltrial.gov were searched from inception to 23 August 2021 without language restrictions. Randomized controlled trials comparing intravenous parecoxib with placebo or another active treatment for acute postoperative pain in adults after orthopedic surgery were included. The primary outcomes were the pain scores and cumulative morphine consumption. The secondary outcomes included the proportion of patients requiring rescue analgesics and the incidence of adverse events. The meta-analysis followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines and was registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews Registration (PROSPERO).ResultsTwenty-seven trials (n = 2840) from more than 20 countries involving six types of orthopedic surgery met the inclusion criteria. Compared with placebo, intravenous parecoxib administration led to reductions in postoperative resting pain scores at 6, 12, 24, and 48 h [mean difference (MD) -0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.71 to -0.03; MD -0.86, 95% CI -1.26 to -0.46; MD -0.57, 95% CI -0.84 to -0.31; MD -0.40, 95% CI -0.69 to -0.11, respectively], postoperative movement pain scores at 24 and 48 h (MD -0.66, 95% CI -1.14 to -0.19; MD -0.78, 95% CI -1.16 to -0.39, respectively), cumulative morphine consumption (MD -11.30 mg, 95% CI -14.79 to -7.81 mg), and the proportion of patients requiring rescue analgesia (relative risk 0.83, 95% CI 0.77-0.89). There was no difference in the incidence of adverse events between groups.ConclusionLow to moderate evidence indicates that parecoxib might be an effective and safe analgesic in perioperative orthopedic settings. It relieves postoperative orthopedic pain while sparing opioid analgesic consumption without increasing the incidence of adverse events.Prospero registrationCRD42021274939.
| S-EPMC9314469 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGabapentin is an antiepileptic drug used in a variety of chronic pain conditions. Increasing numbers of randomized trials indicate that gabapentin is effective as a postoperative analgesic. This procedure-specific systematic review aims to analyse the 24-hour postoperative effect of gabapentin on acute pain in adults.MethodsMedline, The Cochrane Library and Google Scholar were searched for double-blind randomized placebo controlled trials of gabapentin for postoperative pain relief compared with placebo, in adults undergoing a surgical procedure. Qualitative analysis of postoperative effectiveness was evaluated by assessment of significant difference (P < 0.05) in pain relief using consumption of supplemental analgesic and pain scores between study groups. Quantitative analyses of combined data from similar procedures, were performed by calculating the weighted mean difference (WMD) of 24-hour cumulated opioid requirements, and the WMD for visual analogue scale (VAS) pain, (early (6 h) and late (24 h) postoperatively), between study groups. Side-effects (nausea, vomiting, dizziness and sedation) were extracted for calculation of their relative risk (RR).ResultsTwenty-three trials with 1529 patients were included. In 12 of 16 studies with data on postoperative opioid requirement, the reported 24-hour opioid consumption was significantly reduced with gabapentin. Quantitative analysis of five trials in abdominal hysterectomy showed a significant reduction in morphine consumption (WMD - 13 mg, 95% confidence interval (CI) -19 to -8 mg), and in early pain scores at rest (WMD - 11 mm on the VAS, 95% CI -12 to -2 mm) and during activity (WMD -8 mm on the VAS; 95% CI -13 to -3 mm), favouring gabapentin. In spinal surgery, (4 trials), analyses demonstrated a significant reduction in morphine consumption (WMD of - 31 mg (95%CI - 53 to -10 mg) and pain scores, early (WMD - 17 mm on the VAS; 95 % CI -31 to -3 mm) and late (WMD -12 mm on the VAS; 95% CI -23 to -1 mm) also favouring gabapentin treatment. Nausea was improved with gabapentin in abdominal hysterectomy (RR 0.7; 95 % CI 0.5 to 0.9). Other side-effects were unaffected.ConclusionPerioperative use of gabapentin has a significant 24-hour opioid sparing effect and improves pain score for both abdominal hysterectomy and spinal surgery. Nausea may be reduced in abdominal hysterectomy.
| S-EPMC1950698 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:This is an update of a review published in The Cochrane Library 2008, Issue 4. Celecoxib is a selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor usually prescribed for the relief of chronic pain in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. Celecoxib is believed to be associated with fewer upper gastrointestinal adverse effects than conventional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Its effectiveness in acute pain was demonstrated in the earlier reviews. OBJECTIVES:To assess analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of a single oral dose of celecoxib for moderate to severe postoperative pain. SEARCH METHODS:We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Oxford Pain Database, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The most recent search was to 3 January 2012. SELECTION CRITERIA:We included randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) of adults prescribed any dose of oral celecoxib or placebo for acute postoperative pain. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:Two review authors assessed studies for quality and extracted data. We converted summed pain relief (TOTPAR) or pain intensity difference (SPID) into dichotomous information, yielding the number of participants with at least 50% pain relief over four to six hours, and used this to calculate the relative benefit (RB) and number needed to treat to benefit (NNT) for one patient to achieve at least 50% of maximum pain relief with celecoxib who would not have done so with placebo. We used information on use of rescue medication to calculate the proportion of participants requiring rescue medication and the weighted mean of the median time to use. MAIN RESULTS:Eight studies (1380 participants) met the inclusion criteria. We identified five potentially relevant unpublished studies in the most recent searches, but data were not available at this time. The number of included studies therefore remains unchanged.The NNT for celecoxib 200 mg and 400 mg compared with placebo for at least 50% of maximum pain relief over four to six hours was 4.2 (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.4 to 5.6) and 2.5 (2.2 to 2.9) respectively. The median time to use of rescue medication was 6.6 hours with celecoxib 200 mg, 8.4 with celecoxib 400 mg, and 2.3 hours with placebo. The proportion of participants requiring rescue medication over 24 hours was 74% with celecoxib 200 mg, 63% for celecoxib 400 mg, and 91% for placebo. The NNT to prevent one patient using rescue medication was 4.8 (3.5 to 7.7) and 3.5 (2.9 to 4.6) for celecoxib 200 mg and 400 mg respectively. Adverse events were generally mild to moderate in severity, and were experienced by a similar proportion of participants in celecoxib and placebo groups. One serious adverse event probably related to celecoxib was reported. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:Single-dose oral celecoxib is an effective analgesic for postoperative pain relief. Indirect comparison suggests that the 400 mg dose has similar efficacy to ibuprofen 400 mg.
| S-EPMC4161494 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDiclofenac is a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, available as a potassium salt (immediate release) or sodium salt (enteric coated to suppress dissolution in the stomach). This review updates an earlier review published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Issue 2, 2009) entitled 'Single dose oral diclofenac for acute postoperative pain in adults'.ObjectivesTo assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of a single oral dose of diclofenac for moderate to severe postoperative pain, using methods that permit comparison with other analgesics evaluated in standardised trials using almost identical methods and outcomes.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Oxford Pain Relief Database, two clinical trial registries, and the reference lists of articles. The date of the most recent search was 9 March 2015.Selection criteriaRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials of single dose, oral diclofenac (sodium or potassium) for acute postoperative pain in adults.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently considered studies for inclusion in the review, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. We used the area under the pain relief versus time curve to derive the proportion of participants with at least 50% pain relief over six hours prescribed either diclofenac or placebo. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and number needed to treat to benefit (NNT). We used information on the use of rescue medication to calculate the proportion of participants requiring rescue medication and the weighted mean of the median time to use. We also collected information on adverse effects.Main resultsThis update included three new studies, providing a 26% increase in participants in comparisons between diclofenac and placebo. We included 18 studies involving 3714 participants, 1902 treated with diclofenac and 1007 with placebo. This update has also changed the focus of the review, examining the effects of formulation in more detail than previously. This is a result of increased understanding of the importance of speed of onset in determining analgesic efficacy in acute pain.The largest body of information, for diclofenac potassium 50 mg, in seven studies, produced an NNT for at least 50% of maximum pain relief compared with placebo of 2.1 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.9 to 2.5) (high quality evidence). There was a graded improvement in efficacy as doses rose from 25 mg to 100 mg, both for participants achieving at least 50% maximum pain relief, and for remedication within 6 to 8 hours. Fast-acting formulations (dispersible products, solutions, and softgel formulations) had a similar efficacy for a 50 mg dose, with an NNT of 2.4 (2.0 to 3.0). Diclofenac sodium in a small number of studies produced a lesser effect, with an NNT of 6.6 (4.1 to 17) for the 50 mg dose.Adverse event rates were low in these single dose studies, with no difference between diclofenac and placebo (moderate quality evidence).Authors' conclusionsDiclofenac potassium provides good pain relief at 25 mg, 50 mg, and 100 mg doses. Diclofenac sodium has limited efficacy and should probably not be used in acute pain.
| S-EPMC6485701 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere is good evidence that combining two different analgesics in fixed doses in a single tablet can provide better pain relief in acute pain and headache than either drug alone, and that the drug-specific benefits are essentially additive. This appears to be broadly true in postoperative pain and migraine headache across a range of different drug combinations, and when tested in the same and different trials. Adding caffeine to analgesics also increases the number of people obtaining good pain relief. Combinations of ibuprofen and caffeine are available without prescription in some parts of the world.ObjectivesTo assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of a single oral dose of ibuprofen plus caffeine for moderate to severe postoperative pain, using methods that permit comparison with other analgesics evaluated in standardised trials using almost identical methods and outcomes.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Oxford Pain Relief Database, two clinical trial registries, and the reference lists of articles. The date of the most recent search was 1 February 2015.Selection criteriaRandomised, double-blind, placebo- or active-controlled clinical trials of single dose oral ibuprofen plus caffeine for acute postoperative pain in adults.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently considered trials for inclusion in the review, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. We used the area under the pain relief versus time curve to derive the proportion of participants with at least 50% pain relief over six hours prescribed either ibuprofen plus caffeine or placebo. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and number needed to treat to benefit (NNT). We used information on the use of rescue medication to calculate the proportion of participants requiring rescue medication and the weighted mean of the median time to use. We also collected information on adverse effects.Main resultsWe identified five randomised, double-blind studies with 1501 participants, but only four had been published and had relevant outcome data. These four studies were of high quality, although two of the studies were small.Both ibuprofen 200 mg + caffeine 100 mg and ibuprofen 100 mg + caffeine 100 mg produced significantly more participants than placebo who achieved at least 50% of maximum pain relief over six hours, and both doses significantly reduced remedication rates (moderate quality evidence). For at least 50% of maximum pain relief, the NNT was 2.1 (95% confidence interval 1.8 to 2.5) for ibuprofen 200 mg + caffeine 100 mg (four studies, 334 participants) and 2.4 (1.9 to 3.1) for ibuprofen 100 mg + caffeine 100 mg (two studies, 200 participants) (moderate quality evidence). These values were close to those predicted by published models for combination analgesics in acute pain, and were supported by low (good) NNT values for prevention of remedication.Adverse event rates were low, and no sensible analysis was possible.Authors' conclusionsFor ibuprofen 200 mg + caffeine 100 mg particularly, the low NNT value is among the lowest (best) values for analgesics in this pain model. The combination is not commonly available, but can be probably be achieved by taking a single 200 mg ibuprofen tablet with a cup of modestly strong coffee or caffeine tablets. In principle, this can deliver good analgesia at lower doses of ibuprofen.
| S-EPMC6481458 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Activation of nicotinic receptors with nicotine has been shown to reduce post-surgical pain in clinical and preclinical studies. Choline is a selective agonist at ?7-type nicotinic receptors that does not have addictive or sympathetic activating properties. It is anti-nociceptive in animal studies. We conducted a double-blind randomized trial of oral choline supplementation with lecithin to aid in the treatment of pain after gynaecological surgery.Sixty women having open gynaecological surgery were randomly assigned to receive 20 g of lecithin before surgery or placebo. Plasma choline concentration and tumour necrosis factor (TNF) were measured. Pain report was the primary outcome measure.We achieved a small but statistically significant increase in choline after surgery with oral supplementation. Plasma TNF was not decreased and pain report was not different between groups at rest or with movement. There were no adverse effects of treatment.Oral supplementation with lecithin during the perioperative period resulted in very slow absorption and thus only a small increase in plasma choline was achieved. This concentration was inadequate to reduce TNF as has been shown in other studies. The absence of an anti-inflammatory effect was likely related to our failure to demonstrate efficacy in pain reduction.
| S-EPMC3841409 | biostudies-literature