1
|
Huang J, Gan Y, Xu H, Zhu H, Han S, Li N, Li D, Cai Z. Acute Pain Management Following Mandibular Third Molar Exodontia: A Bibliometric Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Int Dent J 2025; 75:939-948. [PMID: 39370337 PMCID: PMC11976606 DOI: 10.1016/j.identj.2024.09.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/28/2024] [Revised: 08/08/2024] [Accepted: 09/15/2024] [Indexed: 10/08/2024] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND AIMS To reveal the evolution of pain management strategies following mandibular third molar (M3M) exodontia, examine the geographic contribution of research, and explore future developments through a bibliometric analysis. METHODS A comprehensive search was conducted in various leading databases. Data on bibliometrics, participant demographics, and agent regimens were extracted for eligible studies. Descriptive bibliometrics, citation analysis, and keyword bursts were performed to assess the research outputs, distribution, and emerging hotspots. RESULTS A total of 173 randomized control trials from 2004 to 2024 were included. The number of publications showed a consistent upward trend since 2007. Brazil exhibited the most publications and citations. Germany presented the highest mean citations per publication. Brazil, Spain, and Italy showed the closest collaboration. Appropriately 14,391participants with 14,710 extracted M3M were enrolled. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were the most extensively studied analgesics, followed by glucocorticoids, opioids, and paracetamol. NSAIDs and paracetamol were predominantly administered orally, whereas glucocorticoids and opioids were primarily applied topically (P < .001). Studies on opioids significantly predated the studies using other agents. Adverse events were found in 50.87% of the included studies, where nausea and vomiting were the most frequently reported. Tramadol and piroxicam have drawn increasing interest in recent years. CONCLUSIONS This study revealed information on the research outputs, distribution, and future developments of analgesic agents following M3M exodontia. Brazil exhibited the highest level of productivity and recorded the most citations. NSAIDs generated the largest amount of research and are emerging as a benchmark for comparative studies. Oral administration is the most frequently used approach for agent delivery. Nausea and vomiting are the most commonly reported adverse effects. CLINICAL RELEVANCE The bibliometric analysis offers insights into the field of pain management following mandibular 3rd molar exodontia and how it has evolved. Tramadol and piroxicam have become research hotspots in recent years.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jinwei Huang
- Department of General Dentistry Ⅱ, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, Beijing, P.R. China; National Center for Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices, Beijing, P.R. China
| | - Yena Gan
- Department of Tuina and Pain, Dongzhimen Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, P.R. China
| | - He Xu
- National Center for Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices, Beijing, P.R. China; Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, Beijing, P.R. China
| | - He Zhu
- Department of Academic Research, International Research Center for Medicinal Administration, Peking University, Beijing, P.R. China
| | - Sheng Han
- Department of Academic Research, International Research Center for Medicinal Administration, Peking University, Beijing, P.R. China
| | - Nan Li
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, P.R. China
| | - Duoduo Li
- Department of Tuina and Pain, Dongzhimen Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, P.R. China
| | - Zhigang Cai
- National Center for Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices, Beijing, P.R. China; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, Beijing, P.R. China.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Pessano S, Gloeck NR, Tancredi L, Ringsten M, Hohlfeld A, Ebrahim S, Albertella M, Kredo T, Bruschettini M. Ibuprofen for acute postoperative pain in children. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2024; 1:CD015432. [PMID: 38180091 PMCID: PMC10767793 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd015432.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/06/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Children often require pain management following surgery to avoid suffering. Effective pain management has consequences for healing time and quality of life. Ibuprofen, a frequently used non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) administered to children, is used to treat pain and inflammation in the postoperative period. OBJECTIVES 1) To assess the efficacy and safety of ibuprofen (any dose) for acute postoperative pain management in children compared with placebo or other active comparators. 2) To compare ibuprofen administered at different doses, routes (e.g. oral, intravenous, etc.), or strategies (e.g. as needed versus as scheduled). SEARCH METHODS We used standard Cochrane search methods. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and trials registries in August 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in children aged 17 years and younger, treated for acute postoperative or postprocedural pain, that compared ibuprofen to placebo or any active comparator. We included RCTs that compared different administration routes, doses of ibuprofen and schedules. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We adhered to standard Cochrane methods for data collection and analysis. Our primary outcomes were pain relief reported by the child, pain intensity reported by the child, adverse events, and serious adverse events. We present results using risk ratios (RR) and standardised mean differences (SMD), with the associated confidence intervals (CI). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS We included 43 RCTs that enroled 4265 children (3935 children included in this review). We rated the overall risk of bias at the study level as high or unclear for 37 studies that had one or several unclear or high risk of bias judgements across the domains. We judged six studies as having a low risk of bias across all domains. Ibuprofen versus placebo (35 RCTs) No studies reported pain relief reported by the child or a third party, or serious adverse events. Ibuprofen probably reduces child-reported pain intensity less than two hours postintervention compared to placebo (SMD -1.12, 95% CI -1.39 to -0.86; 3 studies, 259 children; moderate-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen may reduce child-reported pain intensity, two hours to less than 24 hours postintervention (SMD -1.01, 95% CI -1.24 to -0.78; 5 studies, 345 children; low-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen may result in little to no difference in adverse events compared to placebo (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.23; 5 studies, 384 children; low-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen versus paracetamol (21 RCTs) No studies reported pain relief reported by the child or a third party, or serious adverse events. Ibuprofen likely reduces child-reported pain intensity less than two hours postintervention compared to paracetamol (SMD -0.42, 95% CI -0.82 to -0.02; 2 studies, 100 children; moderate-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen may slightly reduce child-reported pain intensity two hours to 24 hours postintervention (SMD -0.21, 95% CI -0.40 to -0.02; 6 studies, 422 children; low-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen may result in little to no difference in adverse events (0 events in each group; 1 study, 44 children; low-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen versus morphine (1 RCT) No studies reported pain relief or pain intensity reported by the child or a third party, or serious adverse events. Ibuprofen likely results in a reduction in adverse events compared to morphine (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.83; risk difference (RD) -0.25, 95% CI -0.40 to -0.09; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 4; 1 study, 154 children; moderate-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen versus ketorolac (1 RCT) No studies reported pain relief or pain intensity reported by the child, or serious adverse events. Ibuprofen may result in a reduction in adverse events compared to ketorolac (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.96; RD -0.29, 95% CI -0.53 to -0.04; NNTB 4; 1 study, 59 children; low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Despite identifying 43 RCTs, we remain uncertain about the effect of ibuprofen compared to placebo or active comparators for some critical outcomes and in the comparisons between different doses, schedules and routes for ibuprofen administration. This is largely due to poor reporting on important outcomes such as serious adverse events, and poor study conduct or reporting that reduced our confidence in the results, along with small underpowered studies. Compared to placebo, ibuprofen likely results in pain reduction less than two hours postintervention, however, the efficacy might be lower at two hours to 24 hours. Compared to paracetamol, ibuprofen likely results in pain reduction up to 24 hours postintervention. We could not explore if there was a different effect in different kinds of surgeries or procedures. Ibuprofen likely results in a reduction in adverse events compared to morphine, and in little to no difference in bleeding when compared to paracetamol. We remain mostly uncertain about the safety of ibuprofen compared to other drugs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sara Pessano
- Pediatric Clinic and Endocrinology Unit, IRCCS Istituto G. Gaslini, Genoa, Italy
| | - Natasha R Gloeck
- Health Systems Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa
| | - Luca Tancredi
- Geriatrie, Hessing Stiftung, Augsburg, Germany
- Medical School, Regiomed, Coburg, Germany
| | - Martin Ringsten
- Cochrane Sweden, Department of Research and Education, Skåne University Hospital, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
| | - Ameer Hohlfeld
- Health Systems Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa
| | - Sumayyah Ebrahim
- Health Systems Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa
- Department of Surgery, School of Clinical Medicine, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa
| | | | - Tamara Kredo
- Health Systems Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa
- Cochrane South Africa, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa
- Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Department of Medicine and Division of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Department of Global Health, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa
| | - Matteo Bruschettini
- Cochrane Sweden, Department of Research and Education, Skåne University Hospital, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
- Paediatrics, Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Pergolizzi JV, Breve F, Magnusson P, LeQuang JK, Varassi G. Current and emerging COX inhibitors for treating postoperative pain following oral surgery. Expert Opin Pharmacother 2023; 24:347-358. [PMID: 36562415 DOI: 10.1080/14656566.2022.2161364] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The numerous drugs in the NSAID class are often used to treat acute postoperative pain associated with oral surgery such as impacted third-molar extractions. These drugs are effective in this setting and dental pain studies often serve as models for acute pain relief and for registration of analgesics. With numerous cyclooxygenase (COX) inhibitors available as monotherapy, for use in combination with analgesic regimens, and in different doses and formulations, it was our aim to determine if there were clear-cut distinctions among these products and dosing regimens. AREAS COVERED This is a literature review of recent randomized controlled clinical trials evaluating NSAIDs for use in postoperative pain management following oral surgery. Of particular interest were head-to-head studies, which might offer some insight into comparative effectiveness. EXPERT OPINION Postoperative oral surgery pain is largely managed in real-world clinical practice using NSAIDs, either alone or in combination, and there is good evidence supporting their use especially in multimodal therapy. Head-to-head and comparative studies do not show a clear-cut 'optimal NSAID' in this setting, although ibuprofen, ketoprofen, dexketoprofen, and naproxen have gained most acceptance. Combination therapy with other analgesics or adjuvants is largely accepted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Franklin Breve
- Department of Pharmacy, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Peter Magnusson
- School of Medicine, Orebro University, Örebro, SWE
- Cardiology, Center of Research and Development Region Gävleborg /Uppsala University, Gävle, SWE
- Medicine, Cardiology Research Unit, Karolinska Institutet, SWE, Sweden
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Fiore JF, El-Kefraoui C, Chay MA, Nguyen-Powanda P, Do U, Olleik G, Rajabiyazdi F, Kouyoumdjian A, Derksen A, Landry T, Amar-Zifkin A, Bergeron A, Ramanakumar AV, Martel M, Lee L, Baldini G, Feldman LS. Opioid versus opioid-free analgesia after surgical discharge: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials. Lancet 2022; 399:2280-2293. [PMID: 35717988 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(22)00582-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 46] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/16/2021] [Revised: 03/12/2022] [Accepted: 03/18/2022] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Excessive opioid prescribing after surgery has contributed to the current opioid crisis; however, the value of prescribing opioids at surgical discharge remains uncertain. We aimed to estimate the extent to which opioid prescribing after discharge affects self-reported pain intensity and adverse events in comparison with an opioid-free analgesic regimen. METHODS In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Scopus, AMED, Biosis, and CINAHL from Jan 1, 1990, until July 8, 2021. We included multidose randomised controlled trials comparing opioid versus opioid-free analgesia in patients aged 15 years or older, discharged after undergoing a surgical procedure according to the Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the Enumeration of Mortality and Morbidity definition (minor, moderate, major, and major complex). We screened articles, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias (Cochrane's risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials) in duplicate. The primary outcomes of interest were self-reported pain intensity on day 1 after discharge (standardised to 0-10 cm visual analogue scale) and vomiting up to 30 days. Pain intensity at further timepoints, pain interference, other adverse events, risk of dissatisfaction, and health-care reutilisation were also assessed. We did random-effects meta-analyses and appraised evidence certainty using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations scoring system. The review was registered with PROSPERO (ID CRD42020153050). FINDINGS 47 trials (n=6607 patients) were included. 30 (64%) trials involved elective minor procedures (63% dental procedures) and 17 (36%) trials involved procedures of moderate extent (47% orthopaedic and 29% general surgery procedures). Compared with opioid-free analgesia, opioid prescribing did not reduce pain on the first day after discharge (weighted mean difference 0·01cm, 95% CI -0·26 to 0·27; moderate certainty) or at other postoperative timepoints (moderate-to-very-low certainty). Opioid prescribing was associated with increased risk of vomiting (relative risk 4·50, 95% CI 1·93 to 10·51; high certainty) and other adverse events, including nausea, constipation, dizziness, and drowsiness (high-to-moderate certainty). Opioids did not affect other outcomes. INTERPRETATION Findings from this meta-analysis support that opioid prescribing at surgical discharge does not reduce pain intensity but does increase adverse events. Evidence relied on trials focused on elective surgeries of minor and moderate extent, suggesting that clinicians can consider prescribing opioid-free analgesia in these surgical settings. Data were largely derived from low-quality trials, and none involved patients having major or major-complex procedures. Given these limitations, there is a great need to advance the quality and scope of research in this field. FUNDING The Canadian Institutes of Health Research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julio F Fiore
- Department of Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada; Division of Experimental Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada; Steinberg-Bernstein Centre for Minimally Invasive Surgery and Innovation, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada; Centre for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.
| | - Charbel El-Kefraoui
- Division of Experimental Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada; Steinberg-Bernstein Centre for Minimally Invasive Surgery and Innovation, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada; Centre for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | | | - Philip Nguyen-Powanda
- Division of Experimental Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada; Steinberg-Bernstein Centre for Minimally Invasive Surgery and Innovation, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada; Centre for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Uyen Do
- Division of Experimental Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada; Steinberg-Bernstein Centre for Minimally Invasive Surgery and Innovation, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada; Centre for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Ghadeer Olleik
- Division of Experimental Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada; Steinberg-Bernstein Centre for Minimally Invasive Surgery and Innovation, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada; Centre for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Fateme Rajabiyazdi
- Steinberg-Bernstein Centre for Minimally Invasive Surgery and Innovation, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada; Department of Systems and Computer Engineering, Carleton University, ON, Canada
| | - Araz Kouyoumdjian
- Department of Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada; Division of Experimental Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Alexa Derksen
- Patient Representative, Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Tara Landry
- Medical Libraries, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada; Bibliothèque de la Santé, Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | | | - Amy Bergeron
- Medical Libraries, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Agnihotram V Ramanakumar
- Centre for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Marc Martel
- Faculty of Dentistry, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada; Department of Anaesthesia, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Lawrence Lee
- Department of Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada; Division of Experimental Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada; Steinberg-Bernstein Centre for Minimally Invasive Surgery and Innovation, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada; Centre for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Gabriele Baldini
- Division of Experimental Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada; Department of Anaesthesia, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Liane S Feldman
- Department of Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada; Division of Experimental Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada; Steinberg-Bernstein Centre for Minimally Invasive Surgery and Innovation, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada; Centre for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada
| |
Collapse
|