Effect of caffeine on ibuprofen analgesia in postoperative oral surgery pain

Ibuprofen for acute postoperative pain in children

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.

Provider-directed analgesia for dental pain

INTRODUCTION

Extraction of impacted molar teeth is a common procedure performed by oral surgeons and general dentists, with postoperative pain being a significant adverse event post-surgery. If mismanaged, pain can lead to complications that impact oral and systemic health. The current scourge of the opioid epidemic has ushered in a new era of provider-directed analgesic (PDA) therapy in dentistry.

AREAS COVERED

This article provides an in-depth review on the major pharmacological and therapeutic properties of established and alternative analgesics used to manage dental pain.

EXPERT OPINION

Substantial evidence-based literature shows combination of a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID; e.g. ibuprofen) and acetaminophen provides superior pain relief than single-agent or combination opioid regimens. However, there are clinical scenarios (e.g. severe pain) when short-course opioid prescription is appropriate in select patients, in which a 2-3-day treatment duration is typically sufficient. Alternative agents (e.g. caffeine, gabapentin, phytotherapies), typically in combination with established agents, can mitigate postoperative dental pain. Some evidence suggests preemptive therapies (e.g. corticosteroids, NSAIDs) reduce amounts of postsurgical analgesic consumption and might lessen opioid prescription burden. In summary, this comprehensive review provides an opportune update on the evolving landscape of pharmacotherapy for acute postsurgical dental pain, informing best practices for PDA in the dental setting.

Caffeine: What Is Its Role in Pain Medicine?

Caffeine is the world's most widely used psychoactive legal substance. The involvement of caffeine in pain management has gotten minimal attention in the past, but it is getting more attention now. This article provides a brief assessment of the literature to clarify the role of caffeine as a pain reliever and stimulate the interest of researchers. Caffeine affects adenosine receptors, which are involved in nociception, and plays a significant role in pain regulation. Caffeine's usage as an adjuvant therapy has been extensively documented in the literature, and it is now accessible in certain over-the-counter drugs. The mixture of coffee and morphine for pain reduction in individuals with terminal cancer has shown mixed outcomes in studies. Caffeine can be utilized for hypnic headaches and post-dural puncture headaches since it is crucial in pain regulation. Caffeine has the potential to help in pain management. Caffeine's usage for migraines and end-stage cancer disease is not well acknowledged. Further research is essential to focus on caffeine's potential role in various forms of pain, including dosage escalation and outcome assessment standardization.

A randomized, placebo- and active-controlled, multi-country, multi-center parallel group trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a fixed-dose combination of 400 mg ibuprofen and 100 mg caffeine compared with ibuprofen 400 mg and placebo in patients with acute lower back or neck pain

Background

Ibuprofen is a well-established analgesic for acute pain symptoms. In several acute pain models, caffeine has demonstrated an analgesic adjuvant effect. This randomized trial (NCT03003000) was designed to compare the efficacy of a fixed-dose combination of ibuprofen and caffeine with ibuprofen or placebo for the treatment of acute lower back/neck pain.

Methods

Patients with acute lower back/neck pain resulting in pain on movement (POM) ≥5 on a 10-point numerical rating scale were randomized 2:2:1 to receive orally, three times daily for 6 days, 400 mg ibuprofen+100 mg caffeine, 400 mg ibuprofen or placebo, respectively. The primary endpoint was change in POM_WP (POM triggering highest pain score at baseline [worst procedure]) between baseline and the morning of day 2. Key secondary endpoints included POM_WP area under curve (AUC) between baseline and the morning of day 4 (POM_WPAUC_72h) and day 6 (POM_WPAUC_120h).

Results

In total, 635 patients were randomized (256 ibuprofen + caffeine: 253 ibuprofen: 126 placebo). Active treatments exhibited similar reductions in POM_WP, with an adjusted mean reduction of 1.998 (standard error [SE]: 0.1042) between baseline and day 2 for ibuprofen, 1.869 (SE: 0.1030) for ibuprofen + caffeine and 1.712 (SE: 0.1422) for placebo. Similar results were observed for POM_WPAUC_72h and POM_WPAUC_120h. Safety and tolerability was as expected.

Conclusion

A decrease in lower back/neck pain, indicated by reduced POM_WP, was shown in all active treatment arms; however, treatment effects were small versus placebo. Ibuprofen plus caffeine was not superior to ibuprofen alone or placebo for the treatment of acute lower back/neck pain in this setting.

Efficacy and safety of acetaminophen and caffeine for the management of acute dental pain: A systematic review

AIM

Because the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and opioids has several restrictions, this review evaluates the efficacy and safety of acetaminophen and caffeine for the management of dental pain.

METHODS

A search of the literature was carried out looking for randomized controlled trials on the use of acetaminophen and caffeine for the management of dental pain, performed on humans and written in English, Italian, French or Arabic languages. The following databases were searched: PubMed, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid Medline and Scopus.

RESULTS

Three controlled clinical trials were retrieved and evaluated by using the Study Quality Assessment Tool of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence.

CONCLUSION

The use of acetaminophen and caffeine appears to be effective in achieving good control of acute dental pain compared to placebo and other analgesic medications, but clinical recommendations cannot be made for the limited number of studies assessed.

Efficacy and safety of a fixed-dose combination of ibuprofen and caffeine in the management of moderate to severe dental pain after third molar extraction

Background

Ibuprofen is an effective analgesic treatment with a ceiling effect at doses above 400 mg. This study compared the combination of ibuprofen 400 mg and caffeine 100 mg with ibuprofen 400 mg monotherapy, caffeine and placebo in the analgesic treatment of moderate to severe acute dental pain following third molar extraction.

Methods

Phase III, active‐/placebo‐controlled, double‐blind, single‐centre, two‐stage, parallel‐group study in adult patients with at least moderate baseline pain intensity. Primary endpoint was defined as the time‐weighted sum of pain relief and pain intensity difference over 8 h (SPRID0–8 h), secondary endpoints included duration of pain relief, time to meaningful pain relief and more.

Results

N = 748 patients were enrolled and N = 562 treated. Mean baseline pain intensity was 7.7 on a 0–10 numerical rating scale. Analysis of SPRID0–8 h demonstrated superior analgesic effects for a single dose of ibuprofen/caffeine versus ibuprofen, caffeine and placebo over 8 h, rescue medication in this stage was requested by more patients on ibuprofen (32.5%) than on ibuprofen/caffeine (16.0%). Median time to meaningful pain relief was shorter for ibuprofen/caffeine (1.13 h) compared with ibuprofen (1.78 h; p = 0.0001). More patients on ibuprofen/caffeine than on ibuprofen reported meaningful pain relief. Adverse events were infrequent and mostly mild or moderate across treatment groups. Tolerability was rated as ‘very good’ or ‘excellent’ by most patients in both treatment groups.

Conclusion

This study demonstrated clinically relevant superiority of ibuprofen/caffeine over monotherapy with ibuprofen in patients with acute dental pain. All treatments were well tolerated.

Significance

This trial showed superior efficacy of 400/100 mg ibuprofen/caffeine, compared to 400 mg ibuprofen alone, for treating acute pain, reflecting that caffeine is an effective analgesic adjuvant. Data on efficacy of 400 mg ibuprofen combined with caffeine for the treatment of acute pain were not available yet.

Antinociceptive Effect of Racemic Flurbiprofen and Caffeine Co-Administration in an Arthritic Gout-Type Pain in Rats

Preclinical Research Drug combinations are routinely used in the treatment of pain. In drug associations, adjuvants such as caffeine, are employed with different non-steroidal anti-inflammatories drugs (NSAIDs), however, at present does not exist studies showing the effect of the combination of racemic flurbiprofen (rac-Flur) in association with caffeine. The objective of this work was to evaluate the combination of rac-Flur + caffeine oral in arthritic gout-type pain in rats. The antinociceptive effects of the rac-Flur alone and in combination with caffeine were analyzed on a pain-induced functional impairment model in rat. rac-Flur induced a dose-dependent antinociceptive effect and caffeine did not present any effect. The combination of rac-Flur and caffeine achieve a higher percentage of antinociceptive effect compared with the individual administration of rac-Flur. The dose-response curve (DRCs) shows that the combination of rac-Flur (31.6 mg/kg) + caffeine (17.8 mg/kg) exhibited the maximal antinociceptive efficacy (294.0 ± 21.2 area units), while rac-Flur alone (31.6 mg/kg) showed 207.2 ± 35.2 au, thus indicating an increase in efficacy (potentiation). Furthermore, the DRCs of the combinations presented a displacement to the left, indicating a change in the potency. Caffeine is able to increase the effect of rac-Flur in the arthritic gout-type pain in rats. Drug Dev Res 77 : 192-198, 2016.   © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Single dose oral ibuprofen plus caffeine for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

There 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.

OBJECTIVES

To 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 METHODS

We 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 CRITERIA

Randomised, double-blind, placebo- or active-controlled clinical trials of single dose oral ibuprofen plus caffeine for acute postoperative pain in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two 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 RESULTS

We 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' CONCLUSIONS

For 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.

Tramadol and Tramadol+Caffeine Synergism in the Rat Formalin Test Are Mediated by Central Opioid and Serotonergic Mechanisms

Different analgesic combinations with caffeine have shown this drug to be capable of increasing the analgesic effect. Many combinations with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been carried out, but, in regard to opioids, only combinations with morphine and tramadol have been reported. The antinociceptive synergism mechanism of these combinations is not well understood. The purpose of the present study was to determine the participation of spinal and supraspinal opioidergic and serotonergic systems in the synergic effect of the tramadol+caffeine combination in the rat formalin test. At the supraspinal level, the opioid antagonist, naloxone, completely reversed the effect of the drug combination, whereas ketanserin, a 5-HT₂ receptor antagonist, inhibited the effect by 60%; however, ondansetron, a 5-HT₃ receptor antagonist, did not alter the combination effect. When the antagonists were intrathecally administered, there was a significant reduction in all tramadol-caffeine combination effects. With respect to tramadol alone, there was significant participation of the opioid system at the supraspinal level, whereas it was the serotonergic system that participated at the spinal level by means of the two receptors studied. In conclusion, the tramadol+caffeine combination synergically activated the opioid and serotonergic systems at the supraspinal level, as well as at the spinal level, to produce the antinociception.

Caffeine as an analgesic adjuvant for acute pain in adults

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 3, 2012. Caffeine has been added to common analgesics such as paracetamol, ibuprofen, and aspirin, in the belief that it enhances analgesic efficacy. Evidence to support this belief is limited and often based on invalid comparisons.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the relative efficacy of a single dose of an analgesic plus caffeine against the same dose of the analgesic alone, without restriction on the analgesic used or the pain condition studied. We also assessed serious adverse events.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE from inception to 28 August 2014, the Oxford Pain Relief Database, and also carried out Internet searches and contacted pharmaceutical companies known to have carried out trials that have not been published.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind studies that compared a single dose of analgesic plus caffeine with the same dose of the analgesic alone in the treatment of acute pain.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility and quality of studies, and extracted data. Any disagreements or uncertainties were settled by discussion with a third review author. We sought any validated measure of analgesic efficacy, but particularly the number of participants experiencing at least 50% of the maximum possible pain relief over four to six hours, participants reporting a global evaluation of treatment of very good or excellent, or headache relief after two hours. We pooled comparable data to look for a statistically significant difference, and calculated numbers needed to treat to benefit (NNT) with caffeine. We also looked for any numerical superiority associated with the addition of caffeine, and information about any serious adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified no new studies with available results for this update. The earlier review included 20 studies (7238 participants) in valid comparisons, but because we used different outcomes for some headache studies, the number of participants in the analyses of the effects of caffeine is now 4262 when previously it was 5243. The studies were generally of good methodological quality, using standard designs and mostly standard scales of pain measurement, although many of those treating postoperative pain were small.Most studies used paracetamol or ibuprofen, with 100 mg to 130 mg caffeine, and the most common pain conditions studied were postoperative dental pain, postpartum pain, and headache. There was a small but statistically significant benefit with caffeine used at doses of 100 mg or more, which was not dependent on the pain condition or type of analgesic. About 5% to 10% more participants achieve a good level of pain relief (at least 50% of the maximum over four to six hours) with the addition of caffeine, giving a NNT of about 14 (high quality evidence).Most comparisons individually demonstrated numerical superiority with caffeine, but not statistical superiority. One serious adverse event was reported with caffeine, but was considered unrelated to any study medication.We know of the existence of around 25 additional studies with almost 12,500 participants for which data for analysis were not obtainable. The additional analgesic effect of caffeine remained statistically significant but clinically less important even if all the known missing data had no effect; the bulk of the unobtainable data are reported to have similar results as this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The addition of caffeine (≥ 100 mg) to a standard dose of commonly used analgesics provides a small but important increase in the proportion of participants who experience a good level of pain relief.

Headache, drugs and sleep

Background

Headache and sleep mechanisms share multiple levels of physiological interaction. Pharmacological treatment of headache syndromes may be associated with a broad range of sleep disturbances, either as a direct result of the pharmacology of the drug used, or by unmasking physiological alterations in sleep propensity seen as part of the headache symptom complex.

Purpose

This review summarises known sleep and circadian effects of various drugs commonly used in the management of headache disorders, with particular attention paid to abnormal sleep function emerging as a result of treatment.

Method

Literature searches were performed using MEDLINE, PubMed, and the Cochrane database using search terms and strings relating to generic drug names of commonly used compounds in the treatment of headache and their effect on sleep in humans with review of additional pre-clinical evidence where theoretically appropriate.

Conclusions

Medications used to treat headache disorders may have a considerable impact on sleep physiology. However, greater attention is needed to characterise the direction of the changes of these effects on sleep, particularly to avoid exacerbating detrimental sleep complaints, but also to potentially capitalise on homeostatically useful properties of sleep which may reduce the individual burden of headache disorders on patients.

Caffeine as an analgesic adjuvant for acute pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Caffeine has been added to common analgesics such as paracetamol, ibuprofen, and aspirin, in the belief that it enhances analgesic efficacy. Evidence to support this belief is limited and often based on invalid comparisons.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the relative efficacy in acute pain of a single dose of any analgesic plus caffeine against the same dose of analgesic alone.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Oxford Pain Relief Database to January 2012, and also carried out Internet searches and contacted pharmaceutical companies known to have carried out trials that have not been published.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind studies that compared a single dose of analgesic plus caffeine with the same dose of the analgesic alone in the treatment of acute pain.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed eligibility and quality of studies, and extracted data. Any disagreements or uncertainties were settled by discussion with a third review author. We sought any validated measure of analgesic efficacy, but particularly the number of participants experiencing at least 50% of the maximum possible pain relief over four to six hours, participants reporting a global evaluation of treatment of very good or excellent, or headache relief after two hours. We pooled comparable data to look for a statistically significant difference, and calculated numbers needed to treat to benefit (NNT) with caffeine. We also looked for any numerical superiority associated with the addition of caffeine, and information about any serious adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 19 studies (7238 participants) in valid comparisons. Most studies used paracetamol or ibuprofen, with 100 mg to 130 mg caffeine, and the most common pain conditions studied were postoperative dental pain, postpartum pain, and headache. There was a small but statistically significant benefit with caffeine used at doses of 100 mg or more, which was not dependent on the pain condition or type of analgesic. About 5% to 10% more participants achieve a good level of pain relief (at least 50% of the maximum) with the addition of caffeine, giving a NNT of about 15.Most comparisons individually demonstrated numerical superiority with caffeine, but not statistical superiority. One serious adverse event was reported with caffeine, but was considered unrelated to any study medication.We know or suspect of the existence of 20 additional studies with 9785 participants for which data for analysis were not obtainable. The additional analgesic effect of caffeine remained statistically significant but clinically less important even if all the known missing data had no effect; that is not likely to be the case.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The addition of caffeine (≥ 100 mg) to a standard dose of commonly used analgesics provides a small but important increase in the proportion of participants who experience a good level of pain relief.

Combined analgesics in (headache) pain therapy: shotgun approach or precise multi-target therapeutics?

BACKGROUND

Pain in general and headache in particular are characterized by a change in activity in brain areas involved in pain processing. The therapeutic challenge is to identify drugs with molecular targets that restore the healthy state, resulting in meaningful pain relief or even freedom from pain. Different aspects of pain perception, i.e. sensory and affective components, also explain why there is not just one single target structure for therapeutic approaches to pain. A network of brain areas ("pain matrix") are involved in pain perception and pain control. This diversification of the pain system explains why a wide range of molecularly different substances can be used in the treatment of different pain states and why in recent years more and more studies have described a superior efficacy of a precise multi-target combination therapy compared to therapy with monotherapeutics.

DISCUSSION

In this article, we discuss the available literature on the effects of several fixed-dose combinations in the treatment of headaches and discuss the evidence in support of the role of combination therapy in the pharmacotherapy of pain, particularly of headaches. The scientific rationale behind multi-target combinations is the therapeutic benefit that could not be achieved by the individual constituents and that the single substances of the combinations act together additively or even multiplicatively and cooperate to achieve a completeness of the desired therapeutic effect.As an example the fixed-dose combination of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), paracetamol (acetaminophen) and caffeine is reviewed in detail. The major advantage of using such a fixed combination is that the active ingredients act on different but distinct molecular targets and thus are able to act on more signalling cascades involved in pain than most single analgesics without adding more side effects to the therapy.

SUMMARY

Multitarget therapeutics like combined analgesics broaden the array of therapeutic options, enable the completeness of the therapeutic effect, and allow doctors (and, in self-medication with OTC medications, the patients themselves) to customize treatment to the patient's specific needs. There is substantial clinical evidence that such a multi-component therapy is more effective than mono-component therapies.

A risk-benefit assessment of paracetamol (acetaminophen) combined with caffeine

OBJECTIVE

To determine the risk: benefit of paracetamol combined with caffeine in the short-term management of acute pain conditions.

DESIGN

Database searches were conducted to identify double-blind trials comparing paracetamol/caffeine with paracetamol alone (benefit analysis) and any data pertaining to hepatotoxicity of paracetamol when combined with caffeine (risk analysis).

INTERVENTIONS

Paracetamol/caffeine (1,000 mg/130 mg) vs paracetamol (1,000 mg) alone.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Assessment of benefit has been derived by meta-analysis. Information on the pain condition and number of patients studied, dosing regimen, study design and analgesic outcome measures (total pain relief scores) was extracted and dichotomous outcomes were obtained by calculating the number of patients in each treatment group who achieved at least 50% of the maximum total pain relief score. Assessment of risk has been made by appraisal of the literature.

RESULTS

Eight studies from four papers provided sufficient quantitative data for satisfactory meta-analysis. The relative benefit (of achieving at least 50% pain relief) of paracetamol/caffeine vs paracetamol alone was 1.12 (95% Confidence Interval 1.05-1.19) across a number of acute pain states (dysmenorrhoea, headache, post-partum pain, and dental pain). Review of the effects of the combination of paracetamol and caffeine on the liver revealed no compelling data to suggest a clinically meaningful increase in hepatotoxicity with use of paracetamol/caffeine combinations.

CONCLUSIONS

Paracetamol/caffeine (1,000 mg/130 mg) is effective and safe for use in acute management of pain. The hepatotoxicity of overdoses of paracetamol results from its oxidative metabolism, caffeine does not produce any increase in oxidative metabolism of therapeutic concentrations of paracetamol.

The efficacy of acetaminophen-caffeine compared to Ibuprofen in the control of postoperative pain after periodontal surgery: a crossover pilot study

BACKGROUND

Previous studies showed that non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have significant benefits in the control of pain after periodontal surgery. Acetaminophen (centrally acting NSAID) is believed to provide less analgesic efficacy than ibuprofen (centrally and peripherally acting NSAID). This study compared an alternative combination of acetaminophen, 500 mg, with caffeine, 30 mg, to ibuprofen, 400 mg, in pain management after periodontal surgeries.

METHODS

A prospective, randomized, double-masked crossover clinical trial was conducted on 15 patients. Open flap debridement was performed on two quadrants with a 3-week interval in between. Each quadrant was randomly assigned to acetaminophen, 500 mg, with caffeine, 30 mg, or ibuprofen, 400 mg, immediately after surgery and 8 hours after the first dose. Postoperative pain was assessed during the first 8 hours and on the following day using the 101-point numeric rate scale (NRS-101) and the four-point verbal rating scale (VRS-4).

RESULTS

Using the NRS-101, the acetaminophen-caffeine group showed statistically significantly lower mean pain scores than the ibuprofen group at 1 and 2 hours (P = 0.002), whereas at 6, 7, and 8 hours, the ibuprofen group showed statistically significantly lower mean pain scores (P <0.001). Using the VRS-4, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups at all periods (P >0.05).

CONCLUSION

Acetaminophen, 500 mg, with caffeine, 30 mg, can be used efficiently in controlling postoperative pain after open flap debridement, especially in patients with gastric ulcers or bleeding tendency because acetaminophen is less hazardous than ibuprofen.

Single dose oral ibuprofen for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

This review updates a 1999 Cochrane review showing that ibuprofen at various doses was effective in postoperative pain in single dose studies designed to demonstrate analgesic efficacy. New studies have since been published. Ibuprofen is one of the most widely used non-steroidal anti-inflammatory (NSAID) analgesics both by prescription and as an over-the-counter medicine. Ibuprofen is used for acute and chronic painful conditions.

OBJECTIVES

To assess analgesic efficacy of ibuprofen in single oral doses for moderate and severe postoperative pain in adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Oxford Pain Relief Database for studies to May 2009.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double blind, placebo-controlled trials of single dose orally administered ibuprofen (any formulation) in adults with moderate to severe acute postoperative pain.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Pain relief or pain intensity data were extracted and converted into the dichotomous outcome of number of participants with at least 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours, from which relative risk and number-needed-to-treat-to-benefit (NNT) were calculated. Numbers of participants using rescue medication over specified time periods, and time to use of rescue medication, were sought as additional measures of efficacy. Information on adverse events and withdrawals were collected.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventy-two studies compared ibuprofen and placebo (9186 participants). Studies were predominantly of high reporting quality, and the bulk of the information concerned ibuprofen 200 mg and 400 mg. For at least 50% pain relief compared with placebo the NNT for ibuprofen 200 mg (2690 participants) was 2.7 (2.5 to 3.0) and for ibuprofen 400 mg (6475 participants) it was 2.5 (2.4 to 2.6). The proportion with at least 50% pain relief was 46% with 200 mg and 54% with 400 mg. Remedication within 6 hours was less frequent with higher doses, with 48% remedicating with 200 mg and 42% with 400 mg. The median time to remedication was 4.7 hours with 200 mg and 5.4 hours with 400 mg. Sensitivity analysis indicated that pain model and ibuprofen formulation may both affect the result, with dental impaction models and soluble ibuprofen salts producing better efficacy estimates. Adverse events were uncommon, and not different from placebo.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The very substantial amount of high quality evidence demonstrates that ibuprofen is an effective analgesic in treating postoperative pain. NNTs for 200 mg and 400 mg ibuprofen did not change significantly from the previous review even when a substantial amount of new information was added. New information is provided on remedication.

Caffeine as an adjuvant to ibuprofen in treating childhood headaches

In adults, caffeine has been shown to enhance the effectiveness of most analgesics, including ibuprofen. This double-blind cross-over pilot study evaluated the effect of ibuprofen and caffeine compared with ibuprofen and placebo in 12 children with headaches. Patients completed diaries for both headaches. Outcome measures included a five-faces severity scale, a measure of clinical disability, and a scale of pain severity. Comparison of the cumulative response scores revealed a trend toward a greater response to ibuprofen-caffeine treatment of headaches (P = 0.14, P = 0.09, and P = 0.07 for the three measures, respectively). Further larger studies are needed to confirm this effect and to identify potential responders.

Caffeine accelerates absorption and enhances the analgesic effect of acetaminophen

The aim of this study was to determine the analgesic effect of acetaminophen compared to a combination of both caffeine and acetaminophen or caffeine alone using tonic and phasic pain stimulation. Twenty-four subjects were treated orally with 1000 mg acetaminophen, 130 mg caffeine, and a combination of both in a 4-way crossover, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Pharmacokinetics and analgesic effects were assessed by means of an experimental pain model based on pain-related cortical potentials after phasic stimulation of the nasal mucosa with CO(2) and based on pain ratings after tonic stimulation with dry air. Analgesic effects of acetaminophen and acetaminophen plus caffeine but not caffeine alone caused a significant reduction of pain-related cortical potentials beginning 30 minutes after medication. The combination demonstrated an enhanced effect throughout the observation time up to 3 hours. Caffeine accelerated acetaminophen absorption, indicated by enhanced early AUCs. Significant analgesic effects of the combination on tonic pain ratings were found throughout the observation time as compared to acetaminophen and placebo. In this study, caffeine enhanced and prolonged the analgesic activity of acetaminophen.

Dose-response in direct comparisons of different doses of aspirin, ibuprofen and paracetamol (acetaminophen) in analgesic studies

AIMS

Establishing the dose-response relationship for clinically useful doses of aspirin, ibuprofen and paracetamol has been difficult. Indirect comparison from meta-analysis is compromised by too little information at some doses.

METHODS

A systematic review of randomized, double-blind trials in acute pain comparing different doses of aspirin, ibuprofen and paracetamol was therefore undertaken.

RESULTS

Fifty trials were found. Numerical superiority of higher over lower dose was found by the original authors in 37/50 trials (74%) and statistical superiority in 11/50 (22%). Twenty-eight trials had design, quality and data reporting characteristics to allow pooling of common doses; in 3/28 (11%) of the individual trials our calculations showed statistical superiority of higher over lower dose. Pooled comparison of 1000/1200 mg aspirin over 500/600 mg was statistically superior, with a number-needed-to-treat (NNT) for higher over lower dose of 16 (8 to > 100). Pooled comparison of 400 mg ibuprofen over 200 mg was statistically superior, with an NNT for higher over lower dose of 10 (6-23). Pooled comparison of 1000 mg paracetamol over 500 mg was statistically superior, with an NNT for higher over lower dose of 9 (6-20).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of trials making direct comparison of two different doses of target drugs revealed the underlying dose-response curve for clinical analgesia.

Enhancement of antinociception by co-administration of ibuprofen and caffeine in arthritic rats

It has been observed that caffeine improves antinociceptive efficacy of some non-steroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in several experimental models, however, these effects have been questioned in humans. Controversy in clinical studies may be due to the use of different protocols as well as to high interindividual variability in patient response. In addition, the antinociceptive interaction of ibuprofen+caffeine has not been studied. To assess a possible synergistic antinociceptive interaction, the antinociceptive effects of ibuprofen, and caffeine administered either separately or in combinations were determined in a model of arthritic pain: "Pain-induced functional impairment in the rat (PIFIR model). The antinociceptive efficacies were evaluated using several dose-response curves and time courses. The antinociceptive effects from the combination that produced the greater effect were compared with the maximal antinociceptive effect of either morphine or acetylsalicylic acid alone. The animals were administered with 0.05 ml intra-articular (i.a.) of uric acid to induce nociception. Groups of six rats received either acetylsalicylic acid, morphine, ibuprofen or caffeine, or a combination ibuprofen+caffeine (18 combinations). We report here that caffeine (17.8 and 31.6 mg/kg) is able to potentiate the antinociceptive effect of ibuprofen. This investigation showed that six combinations presented effects of potentiation and twelve combinations only showed antinociceptive effects not different from that of ibuprofen alone. The maximum antinociceptive effect was 270.7+/-12.7 area units (au), produced by ibuprofen 100 mg/kg+caffeine 17.8 mg/kg; this effect was greater than the maximum produced by morphine 17.8 mg/kg (244.7+/-22.9 au) in these experimental conditions. The maximum potentiation was 197 % produced with the combination of ibuprofen 17.8 mg/kg+caffeine 17.8 mg/kg. These results suggest that the antinociceptive effect of ibuprofen was significantly potentiated by doses of caffeine that by themselves are ineffective in this model.

Efficacy of Diclofenac Sodium Softgel 100 mg With or Without Caffeine 100 mg in Migraine Without Aura: A Randomized, Double-blind, Crossover Study

OBJECTIVE

A phase II, randomized, double-blind, crossover study was designed to evaluate the efficacy of 100-mg diclofenac sodium softgel (formulated using ProSorb technology) with or without 100-mg caffeine versus placebo in migraineurs during migraine attacks.

BACKGROUND

Diclofenac has been demonstrated to be an effective migraine treatment in several placebo-controlled studies. A rapidly absorbed softgel of diclofenac has been shown to be effective in the rapid relief of acute pain, and may have advantages in migraine treatment. In addition, caffeine has consistently been shown to increase both the efficacy and speed of onset of concurrently administered analgesics. The ability of caffeine to both enhance and accelerate analgesic effects has been documented with a variety of different medications (ie, aspirin, acetaminophen, ibuprofen, and ergotamine).

METHODS

The 3-period crossover study was designed to compare diclofenac softgel 100 mg, diclofenac softgel 100 mg plus caffeine 100 mg, and placebo in the acute treatment of migraine. Subjects treated one moderate or severe attack with each study medication. The primary efficacy parameter was the percentage of subjects with headache relief at 60 minutes as defined by a reduction of headache severity from moderate or severe at baseline to absent or mild compared with placebo. Though the sample size estimate required that 72 subjects treat 3 separate attacks, 51 subjects treated 1 migraine attack, 44 treated 2 attacks, and 39 treated 3 attacks. Results.-In the placebo group, 6 (14%) of 43 subjects reported headache relief at 60 minutes versus 12 (27%) of 45 subjects in the diclofenac softgel group, and 19 (41%) of 46 subjects in the diclofenac softgel plus caffeine group. Differences were statistically significant for the diclofenac softgel plus caffeine group versus placebo (odds ratio, 4.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.3 to 13.7). Rescue medication was used by 27 (63%) of 43 subjects treated with placebo, 15 (33%) of 45 subjects treated with diclofenac softgel, and 14 (30%) of 46 subjects treated with diclofenac softgel plus caffeine. This result is highly statistically significant (chi22= 11.56, P=.003). Both the diclofenac plus caffeine (P <.03) and diclofenac only (P <.03) groups were significantly different from the placebo group in terms of the visual analog scale score at 60 minutes.

CONCLUSIONS

The major finding of the present study is that diclofenac softgel plus caffeine produces statistically significant benefits relative to placebo at 60 minutes. Diclofenac softgel alone did not differ significantly from placebo, perhaps due to limits in sample size. Nonsignificant trends support the analgesic adjuvant benefit of caffeine when added to diclofenac softgels.

A benefit-risk assessment of caffeine as an analgesic adjuvant

Caffeine has been an additive in analgesics for many years. However, the analgesic adjuvant effects of caffeine have not been seriously investigated since a pooled analysis conducted in 1984 showed that caffeine reduces the amount of paracetamol (acetaminophen) necessary for the same effect by approximately 40%. In vitro and in vivo pharmacological research has provided some evidence that caffeine can have anti-nociceptive actions through blockade of adenosine receptors, inhibition of cyclo-oxygenase-2 enzyme synthesis, or by changes in emotion state. Nevertheless, these actions are only considered in some cases. It is suggested that the actual doses of analgesics and caffeine used can influence the analgesic adjuvant effects of caffeine, and doses that are either too low or too high lead to no analgesic enhancement. Clinical trials suggest that caffeine in doses of more than 65 mg may be useful for enhancement of analgesia. However, except for in headache pain, the benefits are equivocal. While adding caffeine to analgesics increases the number of patients who become free from headache [rate ratio = 1.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.17 to 1.58], it also leads to more patients with nervousness and dizziness (relative risk = 1.60, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.03). It is suggested that long-term use or overuse of analgesic medications is associated with rebound headache. However, there is no robust evidence that headache after use or withdrawal of caffeine-containing analgesics is more frequent than after other analgesics. Case-control studies have shown that caffeine-containing analgesics are associated with analgesic nephropathy (odds ratio = 4.9, 95% CI 2.3 to 10.3). However, no specific contribution of caffeine to analgesic nephropathy can be identified from these studies. Whether caffeine produces nephrotoxicity on its own, or increases nephrotoxicity due to analgesics, is yet to be established.

Therapeutic uses of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in dentistry

The non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are among the most widely used classes of drugs for the management of acute and chronic pain in dentistry. Their therapeutic efficacy and toxicity are well-documented and provide evidence that NSAIDs generally provide an acceptable therapeutic ratio of pain relief with fewer adverse effects than the opioid-mild analgesic combination drugs that they have largely replaced for most dental applications. The great many studies done with the oral surgery model of acute pain indicate that a single dose of an NSAID is more effective than combinations of aspirin or acetaminophen plus an opioid, with fewer side-effects, thus making it preferable for ambulatory patients. The combination of an NSAID with an opioid generally results in marginal analgesic activity but with an increased incidence of side-effects, which limits its use to patients in whom the NSAID alone results in inadequate analgesia. The selective COX-2 inhibitors hold promise for clinical efficacy with less toxicity from chronic administration and may prove advantageous for the relief of chronic orofacial pain. The use of repeated doses of NSAIDs for chronic orofacial pain should be re-evaluated in light of a lack of documented efficacy and the potential for serious gastrointestinal and renal toxicity with repeated dosing.

Treatment of status migrainosus

Migraine episodes that persist for at least 3 days despite treatment are termed status migrainosus. Traditionally, these long-lasting migraine episodes were treated with brief in-patient hospitalisations for iv. medication. The full duration of disability associated with these episodes includes both the several days of migraine and the several days of hospital stay. The development of medications that specifically target the mechanism of migraine, such as dihydroergotamine and the triptans, has reduced the number of headache episodes that persist after initial treatment or fail to respond to self-administered therapy.

Effect of caffeine on antinociceptive action of ketoprofen in rats

BACKGROUND

To assess a possible synergistic antinociceptive interaction, the antinociceptive effects of ketoprofen (KET), and caffeine (CAF) administered either separately or in combinations were determined in a model of arthritic pain.

METHODS

Antinociceptive activity was assayed using "ellipsis pain-induced functional impairment in the rat" (PIFIR model). The antinociceptive efficacies were evaluated using several dose-response curves and time courses. The antinociceptive effects from the combination that produced the greater effect were compared with the maximal antinociceptive effect of either morphine, acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), or KET alone. The animals were administered with 0.05 mL intra-articular (i.a.) of uric acid to induce nociception. Groups of six rats received orally either ASA, morphine (MOR), KET, CAF, or a combination KET + CAF (24 combinations).

RESULTS

ASA (ED(50) 465.2 +/- 1.5 mg/kg), MOR (ED(50) 71.0 +/- 1.6 mg/kg), and KET (ED(50) 7.2 +/- 1.4 mg/kg) alone induced dose-dependent antinociception, whereas CAF alone showed no activity at the assayed doses. Nine combinations showed various degrees of potentiation (p <0.01), while the remainder exhibited the antinociceptive effect of KET only. Combinations of 17.8 mg/kg CAF with either 1.0, 1.8, 3.2, 5.6, or 10.0 mg/kg KET yielded the highest antinociceptive potentiations. For example, antinociceptive effect was 125.6 +/- 21.4 area units (au) with KET (3.2 mg/kg) alone, but the combination with CAF (17.8 mg/kg) showed 309.5 +/- 10.3 au. The median effective dose (ED(50)) of KET alone was 7.2 +/- 1.4 mg/kg, whereas the ED(50) of KET + CAF 17.8 mg/kg was 0.4 +/- 0.6 mg/kg: KET in the presence of CAF was approximately 18 times more potent than the analgesic drug without CAF.

CONCLUSIONS

These results showed that CAF was able to potentiate the analgesia of KET, but only at selected dose combinations: CAF in the doses of 10.0 and 17.8 mg/kg was able to potentiate the analgesic effect of KET, the most efficacious drug combination being CAF 17.8 mg/kg + KET 3.2 mg/kg. The combination of analgesic drugs and CAF can produce better antinociceptive effects than the analgesic drug alone. This knowledge will permit the selection of the therapeutically most effective combination ratio of drugs, employing lower doses of each drug.

Effects of caffeine and paracetamol alone or in combination with acetylsalicylic acid on prostaglandin E(2) synthesis in rat microglial cells

Paracetamol has mild analgesic and antipyretic properties and is, along with acetylsalicylic acid, one of the most popular "over the counter" analgesic agents. However, the mechanism underlying its clinical effects is unknown. Another drug whose mechanism of action is unknown is caffeine, which is often used in combination with other analgesics, augmenting their effect. We investigated the inhibitory effect of paracetamol and caffeine on lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced cyclooxygenase (COX)- and prostaglandin (PG)E(2)-synthesis in primary rat microglial cells and compared it with the effect of acetylsalicylic acid, salicylic acid, and dipyrone. Furthermore, combinations of these drugs were used to investigate a possible synergistic inhibitory effect on PGE(2)-synthesis. Both paracetamol (IC(50)=7.45 microM) and caffeine (IC(50)=42.5 microM) dose-dependently inhibited microglial PGE(2) synthesis. In combination with acetylsalicylic acid (IC(50)=3.12 microM), both substances augmented the inhibitory effect of acetylsalicylic acid on LPS-induced PGE(2)-synthesis. Whereas paracetamol inhibited only COX enzyme activity, caffeine also inhibited COX-2 protein synthesis. These results are compatible with the view that the clinical activity of paracetamol and caffeine is due to inhibition of COX. Furthermore, these results may help explain the clinical experience of an adjuvant analgesic effect of caffeine and paracetamol when combined with acetylsalicylic acid.

Over-the-counter analgesics and antipyretics: a critical assessment

BACKGROUND

It is just 100 years since the introduction of aspirin to medicine. Since then, aspirin and its derivatives have been joined by acetaminophen, and the nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs--ibuprofen, naproxen sodium, and ketoprofen--as the only over-the-counter (OTC) agents approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the short-term treatment of pain, headache, dysmenorrhea, and fever. Recently the prescription use of aspirin has expanded to include a number of antiplatelet indications.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this paper is to review critically the history, mechanisms of action, efficacy, and tolerability of OTC analgesic and antipyretic products. Relatively new and potential future indications for these drugs are also discussed.

CONCLUSION

Although all of the OTC analgesic/antipyretic agents seem to share a common mechanism of prostaglandin inhibition, there are important differences in their pharmacology, efficacy, and side-effect profiles. Considering their often-unsupervised use, the risk-benefit ratio of this class of drugs has been extremely favorable. However, when used inappropriately, even these drugs pose significant risks to certain patient populations.

Oral ibuprofen and diclofenac in post-operative pain: a quantitative systematic review

Surveys show consistently that pain is not treated well. Improvement depends on knowing which treatments are the most effective. We used systematic review to compare the relative efficacy of two common analgesics, ibuprofen and diclofenac, in post-operative pain. Studies were identified by searching MEDLINE (1966 to Dec 1996), EMBASE (1980 to Jan 1997), the Cochrane Library (Aug 1996), Biological Abstracts (Jan 1985 to Dec 1996) and the Oxford Pain Relief Database (1950 to 1994). We sought randomised, controlled, single-dose comparisons of oral ibuprofen or diclofenac against placebo. Summed pain relief or pain intensity difference over 4-6 h was extracted and converted into dichotomous information yielding the number of patients with at least 50% pain relief. This was then used to calculate the relative benefit and the number-needed-to-treat for one patient to achieve at least 50% pain relief. Thirty-four reports compared ibuprofen and placebo (3591 patients), six compared diclofenac with placebo (840 patients), and there were two direct comparisons of diclofenac 50 mg and ibuprofen 400 mg (130 patients). In post-operative pain, the numbers-needed-to-treat for ibuprofen 200 mg were 3.3 (95% confidence interval 2.8-4.0) compared with placebo, for ibuprofen 400 mg 2.7 (2.5-3.0), for ibuprofen 600 mg 2.4 (1.9-3.3), for diclofenac 50 mg 2.3 (2.0-2.7) and for diclofenac 100 mg 1.8 (1.5-2.1). Direct comparisons of diclofenac 50 mg with ibuprofen 400 mg showed no significant difference between the two. Both drugs worked well. Choosing between them is an issue of dose, safety and cost. Copyright 1998 European Federation of Chapters of the International Association for the Study of Pain.

Single dose oral ibuprofen and diclofenac for postoperative pain

BACKGROUND

Ibuprofen and diclofenac are two widely used non-steroidal anti-inflammatory (NSAID) analgesics. It is therefore important to know which drug should be recommended for postoperative pain relief. This review seeks to compare the relative efficacy of the two drugs, and also considers the issues of safety and cost.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy of ibuprofen and diclofenac in single oral doses for moderate to severe postoperative pain.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Randomised trials were identified by searching Medline (1966 to December 1996), Embase (1980 to January 1997), the Cochrane Library (Issue 3 1996), Biological Abstracts (January 1985 to December 1996) and the Oxford Pain Relief Database (1950 to 1994). Date of the most recent searches: July 1998.

SELECTION CRITERIA

The inclusion criteria used were: full journal publication, postoperative pain, postoperative oral administration, adult patients, baseline pain of moderate to severe intensity, double-blind design, and random allocation to treatment groups which compared either ibuprofen or diclofenac with placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted by two independent reviewers, and trials were quality scored. Summed pain relief or pain intensity difference over four to six hours was extracted, and converted into dichotomous information yielding the number of patients with at least 50% pain relief. This was then used to calculate the relative benefit and the number-needed-to-treat (NNT) for one patient to achieve at least 50% pain relief.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-four trials compared ibuprofen and placebo (3,591 patients), six compared diclofenac with placebo (840 patients) and there were two direct comparisons of diclofenac 50 mg and ibuprofen 400 mg (130 patients). In postoperative pain the NNTs for ibuprofen 200 mg were 3.3 (95% confidence interval 2.8 to 4.0) compared with placebo, for ibuprofen 400 mg 2.7 (2.5 to 3.0), for ibuprofen 600 mg 2.4 (1.9 to 3.3), for diclofenac 50 mg 2.3 (2.0 to 2.7) and for diclofenac 100 mg 1.8 (1.5 to 2.1). Direct comparisons of diclofenac 50 mg with ibuprofen 400 mg showed no significant difference between the two.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Both drugs work well. Choosing between them is an issue of dose, safety and cost.

A review of the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic factors in the potentiation of the antinociceptive effect of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs by caffeine

Caffeine is an effective analgesic adjuvant because it increases the antinociceptive effect of NSAIDs while reducing the probability of side effects. The mechanism by which caffeine increases the antinociceptive action of NSAIDs does not appear to include a pharmacokinetic interaction. The potentiation appears to be due to a pharmacokinetic mechanism including actions at the central and the peripheral levels. Because caffeine shifts the effect-compartment concentration-effect relation of NSAIDs to the left and this relationship is sigmoidal, there is no potentiation if the NSAID concentrations are too high or too low with respect to EC(50). The best potentiation can be observed if the NSAID doses used yield effect-compartment concentrations in the vicinity of EC(50). Therefore further investigation of the PK/PD relations of caffeine-NSAID combinations for different pain states and intensities is needed to optimize the therapeutic use of these mixtures.

Effect of coadministration of caffeine and either adenosine agonists or cyclic nucleotides on ketorolac analgesia

Caffeine potentiation of ketorolac-induced antinociception in the pain-induced functional impairment model in rats was assessed. Caffeine alone was ineffective, but increased the effect of ketorolac without affecting its pharmacokinetics. Intra-articular administration of adenosine and N6-cyclohexyladenosine (CHA, an adenosine A1 receptor agonist), but not 2-p-(2-carboxyethyl)phenethylamino-5'-N-ethylcarboxamidoadenosine hydrochloride (CGS-21680, an adenosine A2A receptor agonist), significantly increased ketorolac antinociception. This effect was not local, as contralateral administration was also effective. Ipsilateral and contralateral administration of adenosine and CHA also increased antinociception by ketorolac-caffeine. Intra-articular 8-Bromo-adenosine cyclic 3',5'-hydrogen phosphate sodium or 8-Bromo-guanosine-3',5'-cyclophosphate sodium (cGMP) given ipsilaterally or contralaterally did not affect ketorolac-induced antinociception. Nevertheless, ipsilateral, but not contralateral, administration of 8-Br-cGMP significantly increased antinociception by ketorolac-caffeine, suggesting a local effect. The results suggest that caffeine potentiation of ketorolac antinociception is mediated, at least partially, by a local increase in cGMP and rule out the participation of adenosine receptor blockade.

Medical management of posttraumatic headaches: pharmacological and physical treatment

Posttraumatic headache can be a very difficult syndrome to manage, especially if chronic. As with most other types of headache, medications are the primary treatment modality, although there is very limited evidence-based data to support any given approach. A number of physical interventions also are available to be used in conjunction with medication, particularly for headaches with a musculoskeletal component. This article will review the general principles of pharmacological treatment for headache and the physical approach to treatment of headaches and head and facial pain. The major categories of medications commonly used for treatment of many varieties of headache will be discussed. In addition, the problems encountered in diagnosing and treating chronic daily headache and analgesic rebound headache are addressed. The approach to treatment of such syndromes as myofascial pain, cervico-zygapophyseal joint pain, neuritic pain, and craniocervical somatic pain are outlined.

A safety assessment of fixed combinations of acetaminophen and acetylsalicylic acid, coformulated with caffeine

Overuse and abuse of phenacetin-containing mixed analgesics has contributed to end-stage renal disease. Combination analgesics, especially those coformulated with caffeine, have been implicated as imparting a greater risk of analgesic-associated nephropathy (AAN) than single or coformulated analgesics without caffeine. This has led to a recommendation that the sale of "two plus caffeine" analgesic mixtures be reclassified from over-the-counter to prescription only availability. There is a rational basis for coformulating acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) and acetaminophen (paracetamol) as this reduces the dose of each, without altering efficacy. The coformulation of caffeine with these analgesics has a significant adjuvant effect and increases analgesic efficacy 1.4-1.6-fold. Currently available animal and human data do not support the notion that the nephrotoxic risk from coformulated ASA and acetaminophen is higher than the risk from either ASA or acetaminophen alone, in equivalent analgesic doses. There are no epidemiological data that implicate caffeine in AAN, and only limited evidence that links excessive acetaminophen usage to renal disease. There is no evidence that caffeine increases analgesics papillotoxicity directly. The presence of caffeine in mixtures of analgesics are no more addictive than other sources of caffeine. There is no evidence to suggest that adding caffeine to analgesic mixtures enhances the potential for promoting analgesic misuse in the general population. Thus distinct therapeutic benefits of ASA, acetaminophen and caffeine appear to outweigh any known risk. It is doubtful if preventing the availability of these products will significantly affect the role of analgesic abuse/overuse in end-stage renal disease. Better risk management would come from a focused educational program, developed in a close collaboration between industry, healthcare professionals and consumer organizations, such a program must warn against the potential dangers of analgesic and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug misuse.

Analgesic dose-response relationship of ibuprofen 50, 100, 200, and 400 mg after surgical removal of third molars: a single-dose, randomized, placebo-controlled, and double-blind study of 304 patients

The purpose of this single-dose, randomized, placebo-controlled, and double-blind study was to evaluate the analgesic dose-response relationship of 50-mg, 100-mg, 200-mg, and 400-mg doses of ibuprofen after third molar surgery. Patients were instructed to take a single dose of either placebo or 50 mg, 100 mg, 200 mg, or 400 mg of ibuprofen when the postoperative pain was moderate to severe. Acetaminophen 500 mg was used as a rescue medication. Pain intensity, pain relief, and any possible adverse events were recorded on self-administered questionnaires hourly for 6 hours after intake of study medication. If rescue medication was taken, the time of intake was registered. A total of 304 patients entered the study, and 258 complied with the protocol. A positive analgesic dose-response relationship of 50-mg, 100-mg, 200-mg, and 400-mg doses of ibuprofen was observed when evaluated by pain intensity difference, sum of pain intensity difference, pain relief, total pain relief, and survival distribution of patients not taking rescue medication. Although significant pain relief was seen after a dose of 50 mg ibuprofen, ibuprofen 400 mg provided maximum pain relief and the longest duration of analgesic effect. Mild transient adverse events were reported by 6.8% of the patients. However, there was no significant difference in frequency between the placebo and 50 mg, 100 mg, 200 mg, and 400 mg ibuprofen dose groups.

Adenosine receptor activation and nociception

Adenosine and ATP exert multiple influences on pain transmission at peripheral and spinal sites. At peripheral nerve terminals in rodents, adenosine A1 receptor activation produces antinociception by decreasing, while adenosine A1 receptor activation produces pronociceptive or pain enhancing properties by increasing, cyclic AMP levels in the sensory nerve terminal. Adenosine A3 receptor activation produces pain behaviours due to the release of histamine and 5-hydroxytryptamine from mast cells and subsequent actions on the sensory nerve terminal. In humans, the peripheral administration of adenosine produces pain responses resembling that generated under ischemic conditions and the local release of adenosine may contribute to ischemic pain. In the spinal cord, adenosine A receptor activation produces antinociceptive properties in acute nociceptive, inflammatory and neuropathic pain tests. This is seen at doses lower than those which produce motor effects. Antinociception results from the inhibition of intrinsic neurons by an increase in K+ conductance and presynaptic inhibition of sensory nerve terminals to inhibit the release of substance P and perhaps glutamate. There are observations suggesting some involvement of spinal adenosine A2 receptors in pain processing, but no data on any adenosine A3 receptor involvement. Endogenous adenosine systems contribute to antinociceptive properties of caffeine, opioids, noradrenaline, 5-hydroxytryptamine, tricyclic antidepressants and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation. Purinergic systems exhibit a significant potential for development as therapeutic agents. An understanding of the contribution of adenosine to pain processing is important for understanding how caffeine produces adjuvant analgesic properties in some situations, but might interfere with the optimal benefit to be derived from others.

Caffeine antinociception: role of formalin concentration and adenosine A1 and A2 receptors

Caffeine produces antinociception in the formalin test at lower doses than in thermal threshold tests. In this study, we examined (a) the effect of formalin concentration on the action of caffeine, and (b) the relative involvement of adenosine A1 and A2 receptors in the action of caffeine. Formalin 1%, 2% and 5% produces a concentration-dependent increase in flinching behaviour in rats. At 5% formalin, the EC50 for caffeine in reducing phase 2 responses (16-60 min following formalin injection) is 40 mg/kg, but at 2%, this is reduced to 5 mg/kg. There is no further shift using 1% formalin. Caffeine has a more pronounced effect on phase 2A (16-36 min) than on phase 2, with significant effects being observed at lower doses. Both 8-cyclopentyltheophylline (A1 selective) and 3,7-dimethyl-1-propargylxanthine (A2 selective) produce a dose-related inhibition of 1.5% formalin flinching behaviours between 1-10 mg/kg. Both agents also produce locomotor stimulation over this dose range, but significant effects occur only at 10 mg/kg. These results indicate that antinociception by caffeine shows a high dependence on stimulus intensity. At 1-2% formalin, doses of caffeine that produce antinociception are now in the range that corresponds to normal human dietary and therapeutic intake levels. Both antinociception and locomotor stimulation appear to be dependent on activation of adenosine A1 receptors, as effects of 3,7-dimethyl-1-propargylxanthine are observed only at a dose which blocks adenosine A1 receptors in addition to A2 receptors.

Caffeine antinociception in the rat hot-plate and formalin tests and locomotor stimulation: involvement of noradrenergic mechanisms

The present study examined antinociception produced by systemic administration of caffeine in the rat hot-plate (HP) and formalin tests and addressed several aspects of the mechanism of action of caffeine. Locomotor activity was monitored throughout. Caffeine produced a dose-related antinociception the HP (50-100 mg/kg) and formalin tests (12.5-75 mg/kg). When observed during the formalin test, caffeine stimulated locomotor activity between 12.5 and 50 mg/kg; this was followed by a depression in activity at 75 mg/kg. Caffeine did not produce an anti-inflammatory effect as determined by hindpaw plethysmometry, suggesting that antinociception was not secondary to an anti-inflammatory action. Peripheral co-administration of caffeine with the formalin did not produce antinociception, suggesting a predominant central rather than peripheral site of action for caffeine. Naloxone (10 mg/kg) did not reduce the antinociceptive or locomotor stimulant effects of caffeine, suggesting a lack of involvement of endogenous opioids in these actions. Phentolamine (5 mg/kg) enhanced antinociception by caffeine in both the HP and formalin tests, but inhibited locomotor stimulation. Prazosin (0.15 mg/kg) mimicked the action of phentolamine on locomotor stimulation, but idazoxan (0.5 mg/kg) mimicked the action of phentolamine on antinociception in the formalin test. These observations suggest an involvement of different alpha-adrenergic receptors in the two actions of phentolamine. Microinjection of 6-hydroxydopamine (6-OHDA) into the locus coeruleus, which depleted noradrenaline (NA) in the spinal cord and forebrain, inhibited the action of caffeine in the HP test. This was mimicked by intrathecal 6-OHDA which depleted NA in the spinal cord, but not by microinjection of 6-OHDA into the dorsal bundle which depleted NA in the forebrain. These results suggest an integral involvement of noradrenergic mechanisms in the antinociceptive action of caffeine in the HP and formalin tests and in locomotor stimulation, but the nature of this involvement differs for the 3 end points.

Evaluation of alternative statistical models for crossover studies to demonstrate caffeine adjuvancy in the treatment of tension headache

This paper discusses alternative statistical models for the analysis of six crossover studies to determine whether better relief of tension headache occurs from treatment with an analgesic plus caffeine (C) than with the analgesic alone (A) or with placebo (P). Each patient in these crossover studies randomly received a pair of distinct medications in such a way as to treat the first two of four headaches with the initial medication in the pair and to treat the third and fourth headaches with the last medication in the pair. In order to have greater power for the C versus A comparison, three times as many patients were randomly assigned to the A:C and C:A sequence groups as to the A:P, C:P, P:A, and P:C sequence groups. An issue of statistical interest for these crossover studies is the extent to which the possibility of unequal carryover effects of the three medications influences the roles of alternative models for data analysis and the interpretation of results. When carryover effects for all three medications are equal, univariate analysis of variance for the difference scores between the average response for the first two headaches and the average response for the third and fourth headaches for each patient provides nearly the same power for pairwise treatment comparisons as more comprehensive multivariate methods for all four headaches. However, for comparisons concerning carryover effects and for treatment comparisons with adjustment for carryover effects, multivariate methods encompassing all four headaches jointly can provide greater power than univariate analysis for difference scores, particularly when there is low intraclass correlation for responses within the same patient. Another noteworthy role for multivariate methods in situations with potentially unequal carryover effects is their capacity to clarify whether multiple types of carryover effects occur across the second, third, and fourth headaches in the respective sequence groups. Multivariate models with alternative specifications of carryover effects are fit to the data from the six crossover studies to compare C, A, and P by weighted least squares. The role of potential variation among centers is addressed in these analyses by the use of stratified proportional means over centers, means of center means, and means ignoring centers. The primary focus of attention in the respective analyses is the evaluation of treatment comparisons with and without adjustment for potential differences among carryover effects of the treatments.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Interaction of caffeine with acetaminophen. 1. Correlation of the effect of caffeine on acetaminophen hepatotoxicity and acetaminophen bioactivation following treatment of mice with various cytochrome P450 inducing agents

The combination of caffeine with acetaminophen (APAP) is used widely in the treatment of headache. The effects of caffeine on APAP-induced hepatotoxicity and APAP bioactivation by liver microsomes from uninduced mice and from mice pretreated with various agents that induce cytochrome P450 were studied. When 1 mM caffeine was included, the rate of glutathione-APAP conjugate (GS-APAP) formation was increased significantly by 33 and 39% in microsomes from phenobarbital (PB)- and dexamethasone (DEX)-treated mice, respectively, whereas this parameter was decreased 39 and 12% by caffeine in microsomes from beta-naphthoflavone (beta NF)- and acetone-treated mice, respectively. A 5 mM concentration of caffeine increased GS-APAP formation by 47, 107 and 117% in microsomes from control, PB-, and DEX-treated mice, respectively, and decreased it 39 and 25% in microsomes from beta NF- and acetone-treated mice, respectively. Caffeine was a competitive inhibitor of APAP bioactivation in microsomes from beta NF- and acetone-treated mice. While caffeine increased APAP bioactivation in microsomes from uninduced, PB-, and DEX-treated mice, the apparent Km values for APAP were increased by caffeine, indicating that this enhancement was not due to a direct effect of caffeine on APAP binding to cytochrome P450 but may be due to an effect of caffeine on the substrate-enzyme complex. The variable effect of caffeine on APAP hepatotoxicity correlated with the effect of caffeine on APAP bioactivation by liver microsomes, regardless of pretreatment. Lack of correlation of aminopyrine N-demethylase, but good correlation of erythromycin N-demethylase activity with the extent of caffeine enhancement of APAP bioactivation following PB or DEX treatment suggests that a murine P450 subfamily similar to the rat P450 3A subfamily may be the candidate in mediating the stimulatory effect of caffeine on APAP bioactivation and APAP-induced hepatotoxicity.