Pharmacological management of renal colic in the older patient

Sterile water injections for management of renal colic pain: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Since the 1950s a small number of centres have used sterile water injections (SWI) to treat renal colic pain. We undertook this review to determine the efficacy of SWI to manage the pain of renal colic.

METHODS

We searched the electronic databases PubMed, Cochrane Central Register, CINAHL, and Scopus from database inception to 7 November 2021 for randomized controlled trials that met the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Six trials were included in the review (n = 894 patients). Two placebo controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis. Other trials compared SWI to Diclofenac, Morphine, or oral Paracetamol. The overall quality of the trial was low. Compared to a placebo SWI demonstrated a significant reduction in self-reported pain at 30 min (Mean difference [MD] = -4.68, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] = -5.21, -4.15. p < 0.001, I² = 0%) and at or beyond 60 min post-injection (MD = -5.34 95% CI = -5.85, -4.82, p ≤ 0.001, I² = 0%). Pain relief provided by SWI was significantly better than oral paracetamol and equivalent to Diclofenac and Morphine. No significant side-effects were attributed to SWI use in any trials.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

SWI could be a suitable alternative for management of renal colic pain where alternatives such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory and opioid drugs are either unavailable or contraindicated. However, further research is required to establish the role of SWI in renal colic pain management.

What Do We Know about Opioids and the Kidney?

Evidence suggests a link between opioid use and kidney disease. This review summarizes the known renal manifestations of opioid use including its role in acute and chronic kidney injury. Both the direct and indirect effects of the drug, and the context which leads to the development of renal failure, are explored. While commonly used safely for pain control and anesthesia in those with kidney disease, the concerns with respect to side effects and toxicity of opioids are addressed. This is especially relevant with the worldwide increase in the use of opioids for medical and recreational use.

Desmopressin effectiveness in renal colic pain management: Systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis of trials was conducted to evaluate the impact of desmopressin on renal colic pain relief in comparison to more typically used medications (opioids and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [NSAIDs]).

METHODS

PubMed, EMbase, Scopus, CINHAL, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for clinical trials. Pain reduction and need for rescue treatment were the outcomes of interest.

RESULTS

Ten studies met our inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Pooling of data showed that, on a scale of 1-10, pain reduction after 30 minutes was significantly higher in NSAID in comparison to desmopressin (3.39 with a 95% confidence interval [CI] of 4.62-2.16; P<.01), but this reduction was not significantly different between NSAID and desmopressin-NSAID combination (-0.28 with 95% CI of -0.62 to 0.05; P=.01). Summary of relative risk (RR) for the need for rescue treatment in desmopressin in comparison to NSAID was 0.31 with a 95% CI of 0.13-0.74 and a significant RR (P<.04), but no difference was shown in desmopressin-NSAID combination in comparison to NSAID (0.70 with a 95% CI of 0.49-1.00; P<.19). On this outcome, desmopressin in comparison to opioid showed insignificant RR (1.82 with a 95% CI of 0.36-4.34; P=.72), but this need in desmopressin in comparison to desmopressin-opioid combination was 0.75 with a 95% CI of 0.56-0.99 and a significant RR (P=.042).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the results of this systematic review suggest that, according to the present low-quality studies, desmopressin can be used as an adjuvant therapy in renal colic management in combination with opioids.

Comparative efficacy of tamsulosin versus nifedipine for distal ureteral calculi: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to systematically compare the therapeutic effect and safety of tamsulosin with nifedipine in medical expulsive therapy for distal ureteral calculi.

METHODS

Databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Clinical Trial Register Centers, were comprehensively searched. Relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were selected, and quality assessment was performed according to the Cochrane Handbook. RevMan software was used to analyze the outcome measures, which consisted of expulsion rate, expulsion time, and complications.

RESULTS

Twelve RCTs consisting of 4,961 patients were included (tamsulosin group, 2,489 cases; nifedipine group, 2,472 cases). Compared with nifedipine, tamsulosin significantly increased the expulsion rate (risk ratio =1.29, 95% CI [1.25, 1.33], P<0.0001) and reduced the expulsion time (standard mean difference =-0.39, 95% CI [-0.72, -0.05], P=0.02). Regarding safety, tamsulosin was associated with fewer complications than nifedipine (risk ratio =0.45, 95% CI [0.28, 0.72], P=0.0008), and further subgroup analysis showed that tamsulosin was associated with a lower risk of both mild and moderate-to-severe complications.

CONCLUSION

On the bias of current evidence, tamsulosin showed an overall superiority to nifedipine for distal ureteral calculi <10 mm in aspects of expulsion rate, expulsion time, and safety. Tamsulosin was supposed to be the first drug to be recommended to patients willing to receive medical expulsive therapy.

Morphine Suppository versus Indomethacin Suppository in the Management of Renal Colic: Randomized Clinical Trial

Background. Renal colic is a medical emergency due to the rapid onset and devastating nature of its pain. Opioids and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are both used as first-line choices in its management. Aim. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of opioids and NSAIDs in the management of acute renal colic. Methods. One hundred and fifty-eight patients were divided into two groups (n = 79) and received either 10 mg morphine or 100 mg indomethacin suppositories. The severity of pain was measured using verbal numeric rating scale at baseline and 20, 40, 60, and 90 minutes after the administration of analgesics. Drug side effects as well as patients' vital signs were also recorded. Results. The mean decrease in the pain score during the first 20 minutes was significantly higher among those who received morphine suppository. However, no significant difference was observed between the two groups regarding the mean decrease in pain score during the first 40, 60, and 90 minutes after the admission. Prevalence of drug side effects or changes in the vital signs was not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusions. Morphine suppositories seem to be more efficient in achieving rapid pain relief comparing to indomethacin.

Urolithiasis in the emergency department

Urolithiasis commonly presents to the emergency department with acute, severe, unilateral flank pain. Patients with a suspected first-time stone or atypical presentation should be evaluated with a noncontrast computed tomography scan to confirm the diagnosis and rule out alternative diagnoses. Narcotics remain the mainstay of pain management but in select patients, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories alone or in combination with narcotics provide safe and effective analgesia in the emergency department. Whereas most kidney stones can be managed with pain control and expectant management, obstructing kidney stones with a suspected proximal urinary tract infection are urological emergencies requiring emergent decompression, antibiotics, and resuscitation.