Median effective dose (ED₅₀) of paracetamol and morphine for postoperative pain: a study of interaction

Effectiveness and safety of prehospital analgesia with nalbuphine and paracetamol versus morphine by paramedics - an observational study

BACKGROUND

Despite the development of various analgesic concepts, prehospital oligoanalgesia remains very common. The present work examines prehospital analgesia by paramedics using morphine vs. nalbuphine + paracetamol.

METHODS

Patients with out-of-hospital-analgesia performed by paramedics from the emergency medical services of the districts of Fulda (morphine) and Gütersloh (nalbuphine + paracetamol) were evaluated with regards to pain intensity at the beginning and the end of prehospital treatment using the Numeric-Rating-Scale for pain (NRS), sex, age, and complications. The primary endpoint was achievement of adequate analgesia, defined as NRS < 4 at hospital handover, depending on the analgesics administered (nalbuphine + paracetamol vs. morphine). Pain intensity before and after receiving analgesia using the NRS, sex, age and complications were also monitored.

RESULTS

A total of 1,808 patients who received out-of-hospital-analgesia were evaluated (nalbuphine + paracetamol: 1,635 (90.4%), NRS-initial: 8.0 ± 1.4, NRS-at-handover: 3.7 ± 2.0; morphine: 173(9.6%), NRS-initial: 8.5 ± 1.1, NRS-at-handover: 5.1 ± 2.0). Factors influencing the difference in NRS were: initial pain intensity on the NRS (regression coefficient (RK): 0.7276, 95%CI: 0.6602-0.7950, p < 0.001), therapy with morphine vs. nalbuphine + paracetamol (RK: -1.2594, 95%CI: -1.5770 - -0.9418, p < 0.001) and traumatic vs. non-traumatic causes of pain (RK: -0.2952, 95%CI: -0.4879 - -0.1024, p = 0.002). Therapy with morphine (n = 34 (19.6%)) compared to nalbuphine + paracetamol (n = 796 (48.7%)) (odds ratio (OR): 0.274, 95%CI: 0.185-0.405, p < 0.001) and the initial NRS score (OR:0.827, 95%CI: 0.771-0.887, p < 0.001) reduced the odds of having an NRS < 4 at hospital handover. Complications occurred with morphine in n = 10 (5.8%) and with nalbuphine + paracetamol in n = 35 (2.1%) cases. Risk factors for complications were analgesia with morphine (OR: 2.690, 95%CI: 1.287-5.621, p = 0.008), female sex (OR: 2.024, 95%CI: 1.040-3.937, p = 0.0379), as well as age (OR: 1.018, 95%CI: 1.003-1.034, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to morphine, prehospital analgesia with nalbuphine + paracetamol yields favourable effects in terms of analgesic effectiveness and a lower rate of complications and should therefore be considered in future recommendations for prehospital analgesia.

Monte Carlo based dosimetry of extraoral photobiomodulation for prevention of oral mucositis

Photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) is recommended for prevention and treatment of oral mucositis, a painful condition that occurs in cancer patients. Intraoral PBMT is limited to treating distal oral mucosa and oropharynx. Extraoral PBMT may provide a more efficient intervention. The goal of this study was to develop a clinically viable protocol for extraoral PBMT. Monte Carlo modeling was used to predict the distribution of 850 nm light for four treatment sites, using anatomical data obtained from MRI and optical properties from the literature. Simulated incident light power density was limited to 399 mW/cm2 to ensure treatment safety and to prevent tissue temperature increase. The results reveal that total tissue thickness determines fluence rate at the oral mucosa, whereas the thickness of individual tissue layers and melanin content are of minor importance. Due to anatomical differences, the fluence rate varied greatly among patients. Despite these variations, a universal protocol was established using a median treatment time methodology. The determined median treatment times required to deliver efficacious dose between 1 and 6 J/cm2 were within 15 min. The developed PBMT protocol can be further refined using the combination of pretreatment imaging and the Monte Carlo simulation approach implemented in this study.

Muscle relaxants as adjunctive analgesics in the perioperative setting: A review of the literature

Patients undergoing surgical procedures are one of the few populations that still require substantial doses of opioid medications to provide analgesia, despite the best efforts of clinicians to integrate non-opioid adjunctive analgesics into practice. While many options exist with varying degrees of evidence, one drug class that deserves renewed consideration are muscle relaxants. Although these medications have differing mechanisms of action and require a more thorough evaluation of patient parameters prior to administration as opposed to other adjunctive analgesics, it is readily apparent by the results of this review that these agents may be able to mitigate pain and limit opioid usage. The objective of this review was to determine the efficacy and safety of adjunctive muscle relaxers for the purposes of analgesia in the perioperative setting.

Paracetamol for multimodal analgesia

Pain and related disability remain a major social and therapeutic problem. Comorbidities and therapies increase drug interactions and side effects making pain management more compounded especially in the elderly who are the fastest-growing pain population. Multimodal analgesia consists of using two or more drugs and/or techniques that target different sites of pain, increasing the level of analgesia and decreasing adverse events from treatment. Paracetamol enhances multimodal analgesia in experimental and clinical pain states. Strong preclinical evidence supports that paracetamol has additive and synergistic interactions with anti-inflammatory, opioid and anti-neuropathic drugs in rodent models of nociceptive and neuropathic pain. Clinical studies in young and adult elderly patients confirm the utility of paracetamol in multimodal, non-opioid or opioid-sparing, therapies for the treatment of acute and chronic pain.

Guidelines for the acute care of severe limb trauma patients

GOAL

To provide healthcare professionals with comprehensive multidisciplinary expert recommendations for the acute care of severe limb trauma patients, both during the prehospital phase and after admission to a Trauma Centre.

DESIGN

A consensus committee of 21 experts was formed. A formal conflict-of-interest (COI) policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guidelines process was conducted independently of any industrial funding (i.e., pharmaceutical, medical devices). The authors were advised to follow the rules of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE®) system to guide assessment of the quality of evidence. The potential drawbacks of making strong recommendations in the presence of low-quality evidence were emphasised. Few recommendations remained non-graded.

METHODS

The committee addressed eleven questions relevant to the patient suffering severe limb trauma: 1) What are the key findings derived from medical history and clinical examination which lead to the patient's prompt referral to a Level 1 or Level 2 Trauma Centre? 2) What are the medical devices that must be implemented in the prehospital setting to reduce blood loss? 3) Which are the clinical findings prompting the performance of injected X-ray examinations? 4) What are the ideal timing and modalities for performing fracture fixation? 5) What are the clinical and operative findings which steer the surgical approach in case of vascular compromise and/or major musculoskeletal attrition? 6) How to best prevent infection? 7) How to best prevent thromboembolic complications? 8) What is the best strategy to precociously detect and treat limb compartment syndrome? 9) How to best and precociously detect post-traumatic rhabdomyolysis and prevent rhabdomyolysis-induced acute kidney injury? 10) What is the best strategy to reduce the incidence of fat emboli syndrome and post-traumatic systemic inflammatory response? 11) What is the best therapeutic strategy to treat acute trauma-induced pain? Every question was formulated in a PICO (Patient Intervention Comparison Outcome) format and the evidence profiles were produced. The literature review and recommendations were made according to the GRADE® methodology.

RESULTS

The experts' synthesis work and the application of the GRADE method resulted in 19 recommendations. Among the formalised recommendations, 4 had a high level of evidence (GRADE 1+/-) and 12 had a low level of evidence (GRADE 2+/-). For 3 recommendations, the GRADE method could not be applied, resulting in an expert advice. After two rounds of scoring and one amendment, strong agreement was reached on all the recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

There was significant agreement among experts on strong recommendations to improve practices for severe limb trauma patients.

Paracetamol: A Review of Guideline Recommendations

Musculoskeletal pain conditions are age-related, leading contributors to chronic pain and pain-related disability, which are expected to rise with the rapid global population aging. Current medical treatments provide only partial relief. Furthermore, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opioids are effective in young and otherwise healthy individuals but are often contraindicated in elderly and frail patients. As a result of its favorable safety and tolerability record, paracetamol has long been the most common drug for treating pain. Strikingly, recent reports questioned its therapeutic value and safety. This review aims to present guideline recommendations. Paracetamol has been assessed in different conditions and demonstrated therapeutic efficacy on both acute and chronic pain. It is active as a single agent and is additive or synergistic with NSAIDs and opioids, improving their efficacy and safety. However, a lack of significant efficacy and hepatic toxicity have also been reported. Fast dissolving formulations of paracetamol provide superior and more extended pain relief that is similar to intravenous paracetamol. A dose reduction is recommended in patients with liver disease or malnourished. Genotyping may improve efficacy and safety. Within the current trend toward the minimization of opioid analgesia, it is consistently included in multimodal, non-opioid, or opioid-sparing therapies. Paracetamol is being recommended by guidelines as a first or second-line drug for acute pain and chronic pain, especially for patients with limited therapeutic options and for the elderly.

The Longitudinal Course of Pain and Analgesic Therapy Following Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: A Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine the duration, intensity, location, and usual treatment of pain throughout hospitalization following subarachnoid hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND

Headache following subarachnoid hemorrhage can be sudden and severe. Little is known about the longitudinal course of headache or its analgesic therapy following the initial diagnosis of subarachnoid hemorrhage.

METHODS

A prospectively maintained database of 564 patients diagnosed with cerebral aneurysms collected from 10/2009 to 2/2013 was searched for conscious patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage. Available electronic records were queried for pain scores (0-10/10), location, and analgesic consumption.

RESULTS

Forty-six adults with subarachnoid hemorrhage met eligibility criteria for inclusion. Mean [CI 95] daily pain was 3.8 [3.2, 4.4] and maximal daily pain was 5.8 [5.1, 6.6]. Eighty-nine percent of patients reported severe pain of 7-10/10, and 63% of patients reported 10/10 pain at some point during hospitalization. While mean [CI 95] pain declined over the course of hospital stay at a rate of 0.06 [0.04, 0.07] units/day (P < .001), mean [CI 95] maximal daily pain changed at a rate of -0.03 [-0.06, 0.01] units/day, which is not significantly different than zero (P = .15). Pain was located primarily in the head in 76% of subjects but pain in the back, neck, limbs, and eyes was also reported. All patients received oral acetaminophen with increasing daily doses. All but three patients, received opioids, most commonly intravenous fentanyl and oral oxycodone. The mean [95 CI] intravenous morphine equivalent dose of opioids consumed was 15.7 [10.3, 21.1] mg/day and changed at a rate of -0.11 [-0.37, 0.15] mg/day which is not significantly different than zero (P = .40).

CONCLUSION

Despite steady consumption of analgesics, the pain reported by conscious patients while recovering from subarachnoid hemorrhage in the hospital is often severe and persists throughout hospitalization.

Evaluation of herbal antimalarial MAMA decoction-amodiaquine combination in murine malaria model

CONTEXT

Co-administration of amodiaquine with MAMA decoction (MD), an herbal antimalarial drug comprising the leaves of Mangifera indica L. (Anacardiaceae), Alstonia boonei De Wild (Apocynaceae), Morinda lucida Benth (Rubiaceae) and Azadirachta indica A. Juss (Meliaceae) was investigated. The practice of concurrent administration of herbal medicines with orthodox drugs is currently on the increase globally.

OBJECTIVE

The study was designed to investigate the possible enhancement of the antimalarial potency as well as possible herb-drug interaction resulting from concurrent administration of MAMA decoction with amodiaquine (AQ).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Combinations of MD with AQ were investigated in chloroquine (CQ)-sensitive Plasmodium berghei NK 65 in varying oral doses (mg/kg) at: sub-therapeutic [MD30 + AQ1.25], therapeutic [MD120 + AQ10] and median effective [MD40 + AQ3.8], using chemosuppressive and curative antimalarial test models. Secondly, P. berghei ANKA (CQ-resistant)-infected mice were orally treated with MD 120, 240, [MD120 + AQ10] and [MD240 + AQ10] mg/kg, using both models. The survival times of mice were monitored for 28 d.

RESULTS

ED50 values of MD and AQ were 48.8 and 4.1 mg/kg, respectively. A total parasite clearance of CQ-sensitive P. berghei NK65 was obtained with the therapeutic combination dose in the curative test giving an enhanced survival time. In CQ-resistant P. berghei ANKA-infected mice, [MD120 + AQ10] and [MD240 + AQ10] mg/kg gave comparable activities with AQ (10 mg/kg) in both models.

CONCLUSION

The therapeutic combination dose gave total parasite clearance of CQ-sensitive P. berghei NK65, whereas none of the doses tested showed notable activity against CQ-resistant P. berghei ANKA.

Single dose intravenous paracetamol or intravenous propacetamol for postoperative pain

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 10, 2011. Paracetamol (acetaminophen) is the most commonly prescribed analgesic for the treatment of acute pain. It may be administered orally, rectally, or intravenously. The efficacy and safety of intravenous (IV) formulations of paracetamol, IV paracetamol, and IV propacetamol (a prodrug that is metabolized to paracetamol), compared with placebo and other analgesics, is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of IV formulations of paracetamol for the treatment of postoperative pain in both adults and children.

SEARCH METHODS

We ran the search for the previous review in May 2010. For this update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2016, Issue 1), MEDLINE (May 2010 to 16 February 2016), EMBASE (May 2010 to 16 February 2016), LILACS (2010 to 2016), a clinical trials registry, and reference lists of reviews for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in any language and we retrieved articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized, double-blind, placebo- or active-controlled single dose clinical trials of IV paracetamol or IV propacetamol for acute postoperative pain in adults or children.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data, which included demographic variables, type of surgery, interventions, efficacy, and adverse events. We contacted study authors for additional information. We graded each included study for methodological quality by assessing risk of bias and employed the GRADE approach to assess the overall quality of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 75 studies (36 from the original review and 39 from our updated review) enrolling a total of 7200 participants.Among primary outcomes, 36% of participants receiving IV paracetamol/propacetamol experienced at least 50% pain relief over four hours compared with 16% of those receiving placebo (number needed to treat to benefit (NNT) = 5; 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.7 to 5.6, high quality evidence). The proportion of participants in IV paracetamol/propacetamol groups experiencing at least 50% pain relief diminished over six hours, as reflected in a higher NNT of 6 (4.6 to 7.1, moderate quality evidence). Mean pain intensity at four hours was similar when comparing IV paracetamol and placebo, but was seven points lower on a 0 to 100 visual analog scale (0 = no pain, 100 = worst pain imaginable, 95% CI -9 to -6, low quality evidence) in those receiving paracetamol at six hours.For secondary outcomes, participants receiving IV paracetamol/propacetamol required 26% less opioid over four hours and 16% less over six hours (moderate quality evidence) than those receiving placebo. However, this did not translate to a clinically meaningful reduction in opioid-induced adverse events.Meta-analysis of efficacy comparisons between IV paracetamol/propacetamol and active comparators (e.g., opioids or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) were either not statistically significant, not clinically significant, or both.Adverse events occurred at similar rates with IV paracetamol or IV propacetamol and placebo. However, pain on infusion occurred more frequently in those receiving IV propacetamol versus placebo (23% versus 1%). Meta-analysis did not demonstrate clinically meaningful differences between IV paracetamol/propacetamol and active comparators for any adverse event.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Since the last version of this review, we have found 39 new studies providing additional information. Most included studies evaluated adults only. We reanalyzed the data but the results did not substantially alter any of our previously published conclusions. This review provides high quality evidence that a single dose of either IV paracetamol or IV propacetamol provides around four hours of effective analgesia for about 36% of patients with acute postoperative pain. Low to very low quality evidence demonstrates that both formulations are associated with few adverse events, although patients receiving IV propacetamol have a higher incidence of pain on infusion than both placebo and IV paracetamol.

Antinociceptive effects of vitexin in a mouse model of postoperative pain

Vitexin, a C-glycosylated flavone present in several medicinal herbs, has showed various pharmacological activities including antinociception. The present study investigated the antinociceptive effects of vitexin in a mouse model of postoperative pain. This model was prepared by making a surgical incision on the right hindpaw and von Frey filament test was used to assess mechanical hyperalgesia. Isobolographical analysis method was used to examine the interaction between vitexin and acetaminophen. A reliable mechanical hyperalgesia was observed at 2 h post-surgery and lasted for 4 days. Acute vitexin administration (3–10 mg/kg, i.p.) dose-dependently relieved this hyperalgesia, which was also observed from 1 to 3 days post-surgery during repeated daily treatment. However, repeated vitexin administration prior to surgery had no preventive value. The 10 mg/kg vitexin-induced antinociception was blocked by the opioid receptor antagonist naltrexone or the GABA_A receptor antagonist bicuculline. The doses of vitexin used did not significantly suppress the locomotor activity. In addition, the combination of vitexin and acetaminophen produced an infra-additive effect in postoperative pain. Together, though vitexin-acetaminophen combination may not be useful for treating postoperative pain, vitexin exerts behaviorally-specific antinociception against postoperative pain mediated through opioid receptors and GABA_A receptors, suggesting that vitexin may be useful for the control of postoperative pain.

Endogenous opiates and behavior: 2014

This paper is the thirty-seventh consecutive installment of the annual review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system. It summarizes papers published during 2014 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides, opioid receptors, opioid agonists and opioid antagonists. The particular topics that continue to be covered include the molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors related to behavior (endogenous opioids and receptors), and the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia (pain and analgesia); stress and social status (human studies); tolerance and dependence (opioid mediation of other analgesic responses); learning and memory (stress and social status); eating and drinking (stress-induced analgesia); alcohol and drugs of abuse (emotional responses in opioid-mediated behaviors); sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology (opioid involvement in stress response regulation); mental illness and mood (tolerance and dependence); seizures and neurologic disorders (learning and memory); electrical-related activity and neurophysiology (opiates and conditioned place preferences (CPP)); general activity and locomotion (eating and drinking); gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions (alcohol and drugs of abuse); cardiovascular responses (opiates and ethanol); respiration and thermoregulation (opiates and THC); and immunological responses (opiates and stimulants). This paper is the thirty-seventh consecutive installment of the annual review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system. It summarizes papers published during 2014 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides, opioid receptors, opioid agonists and opioid antagonists. The particular topics that continue to be covered include the molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors related to behavior (endogenous opioids and receptors), and the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia (pain and analgesia); stress and social status (human studies); tolerance and dependence (opioid mediation of other analgesic responses); learning and memory (stress and social status); eating and drinking (stress-induced analgesia); alcohol and drugs of abuse (emotional responses in opioid-mediated behaviors); sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology (opioid involvement in stress response regulation); mental illness and mood (tolerance and dependence); seizures and neurologic disorders (learning and memory); electrical-related activity and neurophysiology (opiates and conditioned place preferences (CPP)); general activity and locomotion (eating and drinking); gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions (alcohol and drugs of abuse); cardiovascular responses (opiates and ethanol); respiration and thermoregulation (opiates and THC); and immunological responses (opiates and stimulants).

Intravenous Paracetamol Versus Patient-Controlled Analgesia With Morphine for the Pain Management Following Diagnostic Knee Arthroscopy in Trauma Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Background:

Most patients undergoing outpatient surgeries have the unpleasant experience of high level pain after surgery. Compared with open surgeries, arthroscopic procedures are less painful; however, inadequate pain management could be associated with significant concerns. Opioids alone or in combination with local anesthetics are frequently used for diminishing postoperative pain using intravenous or epidural infusion pumps. Despite morphine various disadvantages, it is commonly used for controlling pain after surgery.

Objectives:

The aim of this study was to compare intravenous paracetamol and patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with morphine for the pain management following diagnostic knee arthroscopy in trauma patients.

Patients and Methods:

Sixty trauma patients who were scheduled to undergo knee arthroscopy were randomly divided into two groups. Patients immediately received intravenous infusion of 1 g paracetamol within 15 minutes after surgery and every 6 hours to 24 hours in the paracetamol group. The patient-controlled analgesia group received morphine through PCA infusion pump at 2 mL/h base rate and 1mL bolus every 15 minutes. Pain level, nausea and vomiting, and sedation were measured and recorded during entering the recovery, 15 and 30 minutes after entering the recovery, 2, 6, and 24 hours after starting morphine pump infusion in the morphine and paracetamol in the paracetamol groups.

Results:

There was no significant difference regarding the pain level at different times after entering the recovery between the two groups. No one from the paracetamol group developed drug complications. However, 22.3% in the PCA morphine suffered from postoperative nausea; there was a statistically significant difference regarding the sedation level, nausea, and vomiting at various times between the two groups.

Conclusions:

Intravenous administration of paracetamol immediately after knee arthroscopy improved postoperative pain, decreased analgesic administration, maintained stable hemodynamic parameters, had no complications related to opiates, no nausea and vomiting, and increased patient satisfaction and comfort in comparison to PCA with morphine.