Analgesic effect of oral ibuprofen 400, 600, and 800 mg; paracetamol 500 and 1000 mg; and paracetamol 1000 mg plus 60 mg codeine in acute postoperative pain: a single-dose, randomized, placebo-controlled, and double-blind study

PURPOSE

Effect size estimates of analgesic drugs can be misleading. Ibuprofen (400 mg, 600 mg, 800 mg), paracetamol (1000 mg, 500 mg), paracetamol 1000 mg/codeine 60 mg, and placebo were investigated to establish the multidimensional pharmacodynamic profiles of each drug on acute pain with calculated effect size estimates.

METHODS

A randomized, double-blind, single-dose, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, single-centre, outpatient, and single-dose study used 350 patients (mean age 25 year, range 18 to 30 years) of homogenous ethnicity after third molar surgery. Primary outcome was sum pain intensity over 6 h. Secondary outcomes were time to analgesic onset, duration of analgesia, time to rescue drug intake, number of patients taking rescue drug, sum pain intensity difference, maximum pain intensity difference, time to maximum pain intensity difference, number needed to treat values, adverse effects, overall drug assessment as patient-reported outcome measure (PROM), and the effect size estimates NNT and NNTp.

RESULTS

Ibuprofen doses above 400 mg do not significantly increase analgesic effect. Paracetamol has a very flat analgesic dose-response profile. Paracetamol 1000/codeine 60 mg gives similar analgesia as ibuprofen from 400 mg, but has a shorter time to analgesic onset. Active drugs show no significant difference in maximal analgesic effect. Other secondary outcomes support these findings. The frequencies of adverse effects were low, mild to moderate in all active groups. NNT and NTTp values did not coincide well with PROMs.

CONCLUSION

Ibuprofen doses above 400 mg for acute pain offer limited analgesic gain. Paracetamol 1000 mg/codeine 60 mg is comparable to ibuprofen doses from 400 mg. Calculated effect size estimates and PROM in our study seem not to relate well as clinical analgesic efficacy estimators.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT00699114.

Managing postoperative pain in adult outpatients: a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing codeine with NSAIDs

BACKGROUND

Analgesics that contain codeine are commonly prescribed for postoperative pain, but it is unclear how they compare with nonopioid alternatives. We sought to compare the effectiveness of codeine and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for adults who underwent outpatient surgery.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing codeine and NSAIDs for postoperative pain in outpatient surgery. We searched MEDLINE and Embase from inception to October 2019 for eligible studies. Our primary outcome was the patient pain score, converted to a standard 10-point intensity scale. Our secondary outcomes were patient-reported global assessments and adverse effects. We used random-effects models and grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) to assess the quality of evidence.

RESULTS

Forty studies, including 102 trial arms and 5116 patients, met inclusion criteria. The studies had low risk of bias and low-to-moderate heterogeneity. Compared with codeine, NSAIDs were associated with better pain scores at 6 hours (weighted mean difference [WMD] 0.93 points, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.71 to 1.15) and at 12 hours (WMD 0.79, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.19). Stronger NSAID superiority at 6 hours was observed among trials where acetaminophen was coadministered at equivalent doses between groups (WMD 1.18, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.48). NSAIDs were associated with better global assessments at 6 hours (WMD -0.88, 95% CI -1.04 to -0.72) and at 24 hours (WMD -0.67, 95% CI -0.95 to -0.40), and were associated with fewer adverse effects, including bleeding events.

INTERPRETATION

We found that adult outpatients report better pain scores, better global assessments and fewer adverse effects when their postoperative pain is treated with NSAIDs than with codeine. Clinicians across all specialties can use this information to improve both pain management and opioid stewardship.

Testicular toxicity following chronic codeine administration is via oxidative DNA damage and up-regulation of NO/TNF-α and caspase 3 activities

BACKGROUND

Codeine, a 3-methylmorphine, and other related opioids have been implicated in androgen suppression, although the associated mechanisms remain unclear.

AIM

Therefore, the objective of the current study was to elucidate the in vivo molecular mechanisms underlying codeine-induced androgen suppression.

METHODS

This study made use of twenty-one healthy male rabbits, distributed into three groups randomly, control and codeine-treated groups. The control had 1ml of normal saline daily p.o. The codeine-treated groups received either 4mg/kg b.w of codeine or 10mg/kg b.w of codeine p.o. for six weeks. Reproductive hormonal profile, testicular weight, testicular enzymes, oxidative and inflammatory parameters, testicular DNA fragmentation, histological examination and apoptosis marker were evaluated to examine the effects of codeine use.

KEY FINDINGS

Oral administration of codeine resulted in testicular atrophy and alterations in testicular histomorphology, elevated testicular enzymes, and suppression of circulatory and intra-testicular testosterone. These changes were associated with a marked rise in oxidative markers and decline in the activities of testicular enzymatic antioxidants, as well as oxidative DNA damage, inflammatory response, testicular DNA fragmentation, and caspase-dependent apoptosis (p<0.05).

SIGNIFICANCE

In conclusion, chronic codeine use resulted in testicular degeneration and testosterone suppression, which is attributable to TNF-α/nitric oxide-/oxidative stress-mediated caspase-dependent apoptotic testicular cell death and loss of testicular function.

A Study of Opiate, Opiate Metabolites and Antihistamines in Urine after Consumption of Cold Syrups by LC-MS/MS

Studying the origin of opiate and/or opiate metabolites in individual urine specimens after consumption of cold syrups is vital for patients, doctors, and law enforcement. A rapid liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method using "dilute-and-shoot" analysis without the need for extraction, hydrolysis and/or derivatization has been developed and validated. The approach provides linear ranges of 2.5-1000 ng mL^-1 for 6-acetylmorphine, codeine, chlorpheniramine, and carbinoxamine, 2.5-800 ng mL^-1 for morphine and morphine-3-β-d-glucuronide, and 2.5-600 ng mL^-1 for morphine-6-β-d-glucuronide and codeine-6-β-d-glucuronide, with excellent correlation coefficients (R² > 0.995) and matrix effects (< 5%). Urine samples collected from the ten participants orally administered cold syrups were analyzed. The results concluded that participants consuming codeine-containing cold syrups did not routinely pass urine tests for opiates, and their morphine-codeine concentration ratios (M/C) were not always < 1. In addition, the distribution map of the clinical total concentration of the sum of morphine and codeine against the antihistamines (chlorpheniramine or carbinoxamine) were plotted for discrimination of people who used cold syrups. The 15 real cases have been studied by using M/C rule, cutoff value, and distribution map, further revealing a potential approach to determine opiate metabolite in urine originating from cold syrups.

Likelihood of depressive symptoms in US older adults by prescribed opioid potency: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2005-2013

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the relationships between depressive symptoms and opioid potency among adults aged 50 years and older reporting use of one or more prescription opioids in the past 30 days.

MATERIALS/DESIGN

Adjusted multiple linear regression models were conducted with 2005-2013 files from a secondary cross-sectional dataset, the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Respondents were community-dwelling, noninstitutionalized adults 50 years or older (n = 1036). Predictor variables included a positive screen for minor depression symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ-9] score greater than or equal to 5 and less than or equal to 9), moderate depression symptoms (PHQ-9 greater than or equal to 10 and less than or equal to 14), and severe depression symptoms (PHQ-9 greater than or equal to 15). Criterion variables included weaker-than-morphine analgesics (eg, codeine and tramadol) and morphine-equivalent opioids (eg, morphine and hydrocodone), which served as the reference category, as well as stronger-than-morphine opioid analgesics (eg, fentanyl and oxycodone).

RESULTS

Prevalence rates for symptoms of minor depression, moderate depression, and severe depression were n = 236 (22.8%), n = 135 (13.0%), and n = 122 (11.8%), respectively. Severe depression was significantly associated with high-potency opioid use (odds ratio [OR]: 2.27; confidence interval [CI], 1.16-4.46). In post hoc tests, severe depression remained significantly associated with high-potency opioid use only among respondents without arthritis (OR: 5.80; CI, 1.59-21.13).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with older adults without depressive symptoms, older adults with severe depressive symptoms are more likely to be taking high-potency opioid medications. Future prescription opioid medication research should prioritize investigations among older adults with pain-related diagnoses, other than arthritis, reporting preexisting or new symptoms of severe depression.

Time course detection of dihydrocodeine in body hair after a single dose

BACKGROUND

When head hair is not suitable or not available, body hair, such as leg or beard hair might be the most suitable sample for drug hair analysis. Information about the time course of drugs in hair, from the different anatomical body sites, should still be well documented.

AIM

The aim of this study was to determine and compare (a) the detection window of dihydrocodeine in frequently shaved legs and beard, (b) in unshaved hair from head hair, chest hair, leg hair, and/or arm hair, and (c) the distribution concentrations over the scalp, after a single dihydrocodeine intake.

METHOD

Before a single intake of 12 mg dihydrocodeine by subject 1 (woman), both legs hair were shaved in the morning. The subject 2 (man) shaved his beard in the morning and 30 min later he had a dose of 10 mg of dihydrocodeine. The samples were washed with water and shampoo, dried and collected as follows: Subject 1: every 3-days shaved leg hair (n = 9) and 1-month-later head hair (n = 1). Subject 2: daily shaved beard hair (n = 15), 2 months later head hair (n = 145), and every 20 days unshaved arm, leg and chest hair (from different areas) (n = 4/area). The samples were analysed for dihydrocodeine using a validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method with a limit of quantification (LOQ) of 15.6 pg/mg for dihydrocodeine. About 20 mg of hair samples were weighted, washed with dichloromethane, centrifuged, dried, and pulverized in the same disposable tubes. Then the samples were incubated with methanol (under sonication at 45 °C) during 4 h. After centrifugation, the supernatant was evaporated and a cation exchange solid phase extraction followed by separation and quantification using ultra performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (ULC-MS/MS) was carried out. Chromatographic separation was achieved using a BEH phenyl column eluted with 0.1% formic acid: methanol (0.1% formic acid). The UPLC-MS/MS method was validated and used in routine for drug hair analysis for already several years.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In the present study leg hair was collected every 3 days, as an average of frequent shaved hair in western woman population. Shaved leg hair was very limited and only one hair sample was available per analysis. Beard was collected daily and in a higher amount. Dihydrocodeine was detected in leg hair from the first sample (3 days after the intake). Maximum concentration at 68 pg/mg for the single intake was obtained after 15 days (±2 days), decreasing later to the LOQ from the 21th day. Beard hair was positive from the first day sample, and the maximum concentration was observed at 66 pg/mg, 6 days after the intake, decreasing later to the LOQ from day 13. This may be explained by growth rate and the amount of growing hairs, in anagen phase. In other body hair samples, dihydrocodeine was negative or detected from 1 month after the intake. No significant differences in dihydrocodeine concentrations over the scalp in the different regions were observed (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Body hair presents different time course window detection due to the different growth rates. Frequently shaved leg and beard hair may be suitable samples for recent single dihydrocodeine dose detection from the first days up to 2-3 weeks after the intake, respectively, when a LOQ of 15.6 pg/mg is applied.

Pediatric codeine prescriptions in outpatient and inpatient settings in Korea

OBJECTIVES

To examine the extent of codeine prescriptions for children younger than 12 years in Korea and to investigate characteristics associated with pediatric codeine use.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective observational study was conducted to examine codeine prescriptions and patients' characteristics.

METHODS

We used the Korea Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service National Patient Sample database. The study participants were patients younger than 12 years who were prescribed codeine as inpatients or outpatients between 2011 and 2016. Pediatric codeine use was defined as codeine prescribed at least once for a child younger than 12 years. The frequency and proportion of pediatric codeine users were analyzed by age group (0-2, 3-6, or 7-11 years), sex, year, region, diagnosis, type of medical institution, and coprescribed medication. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify characteristics associated with pediatric codeine use.

RESULTS

Of all patients younger than 12 years, 518,895 (55.8%) and 16,337 (1.7%) were treated with codeine in outpatient and inpatient settings, respectively. Odds of pediatric codeine prescriptions were highest for outpatients at clinics (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.19; 95% CI, 1.16-1.21) and public hospitals (adjusted OR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.28-1.91) and for inpatients at public hospitals (adjusted OR, 8.38; 95% CI, 6.64-10.58).

CONCLUSIONS

Codeine was frequently prescribed for pediatric outpatients in Korea, especially in primary care clinics. Efforts to limit codeine use in children are required to prevent the occurrence of codeine-related adverse events.

Pregnancy outcome following opioid exposure: A cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Opioids constitute a cornerstone of pain relief treatment. However, opioid safety during pregnancy has not been well established. Recent studies reported an association between in utero opioid exposure and spina bifida.

METHODS

In order to further evaluate the association of opioids exposure during pregnancy with adverse pregnancy outcomes, we conducted a large historical cohort by linking four databases: medications dispensations, births, pregnancy terminations for medical reasons and infant hospitalizations during the years of 1999-2009. Confounders that were controlled for included maternal age, ethnicity, maternal diabetes, smoking status, parity, obesity, year and folic acid intake. A secondary analysis for total major malformations and for spina bifida was performed using propensity score matching for first trimester exposure.

RESULTS

Of the 101,586 women included in the study, 3003 were dispensed opioids during the first trimester. Intrauterine exposure to opioids was not associated with overall major malformations (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.97, 95% CI 0.83-1.13), cardiovascular malformations (aOR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.70-1.13) other malformations by systems or spina bifida in particular. However, the risk for spina bifida among newborns and abortuses who were exposed to codeine was four times higher than that of the unexposed (aOR = 4.42, 95% CI 1.60-12.23). This association remained significant in a secondary analysis using propensity score matching. Third trimester exposure to opioids was not associated with low birth weight (aOR = 1.08, 95% CI 0.77-1.52), perinatal death (aOR = 1.38, 95% CI 0.64-2.99) and other adverse pregnancy outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that opioids exposure (as a homogenous group) is not a significant risk factor for overall major malformations. Exposure to codeine during the first trimester was found to be associated with increased risk of spina bifida. However, this finding was based on a small number of cases and need to be verified in future work.

Combating opioid addiction and abuse-2 ways to effectively intervene in the cycle of addiction through pharmacogenomics

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this commentary are to: (1) briefly describe the ongoing challenges of addressing opioid abuse, (2) examine codeine metabolism in terms of pharmacogenomics, (3) describe 2 points of patient contact where pharmacogenomics can be implemented to determine the appropriateness of opioid therapy, and (4) briefly explore the value of pharmacogenomics in opioid-abuse and dependency research.

SUMMARY

Opioid abuse is one of the most significant medical, social, and economic threats facing our country today. Yet for some patients, opioids are the only effective treatment option in achieving pain relief. Differentiating patients who are susceptible to abuse and addiction from those who are not has been absent in standard statistics-based medication prescribing. Pharmacogenomics (PGX) is a burgeoning science that examines how gene variations (variants) influence drug metabolism. With an estimated 23% of the U.S. population unable to properly metabolize codeine and related analogs, PGX could play an immediate role in the management of opioid therapy if applied (1) as part of regular pre-operative screening assessments and (2) prior to or in conjunction with pain-management referral.

CONCLUSION

Using PGX to identify patients who should not begin or continue treatment with opioids because of abnormal metabolic pathways could (1) reduce the number of opioid prescriptions written; (2) reduce related costs; (3) guide more patient-centric, pain-management treatment plans, away from opioids as necessary; and (4) reduce the potential for opioid abuse and addiction.

Is tramadol associated to bleeding peptic ulcer? A nationwide case-control study in hospitalized Swedish patients

AIMS

Tramadol, a widely used analgesic drug, inhibits the reuptake of noradrenaline and serotonin impairing the aggregation function of thrombocytes. However, the risk for severe bleeding has previously not been studied. The aim of the present study is to investigate the association between tramadol and bleeding peptic ulcer in the Swedish population.

METHODS

In this register based case-control study based on the Swedish national patient registry and prescription drug registry, we included 18 306 patients hospitalized with a first-time diagnosis of bleeding peptic ulcer. For every case, 4 matched controls were included. To investigate the temporal aspects of tramadol induced bleeding ulcer, exposure was divided into patients with newly initiated and ongoing treatment. To explore a possible confounding by indication, the effect of codeine, a drug also prescribed for the treatment of moderate pain, but not known to affect thrombocyte function, was investigated. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression was used to analyse the association between tramadol use and bleeding ulcer.

RESULTS

Tramadol was associated with an increased risk of bleeding ulcer (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 2.1, 95% confidence interval: (2.0-2.3). The association was stronger for newly initiated treatment with tramadol 2.8 (2.5-3.2) and weaker for ongoing treatment 1.7 (1.6-1.9). Codeine was also associated with an increased risk of bleeding ulcer 1.9 (1.7-2.1) and this association was also stronger for newly initiated treatment with codeine 2.3 (2.0-2.6) and weaker for ongoing treatment 1.7 (1.5-1.9).

CONCLUSION

Treatment with tramadol was associated with an increased risk of bleeding peptic ulcer. Most of this association may be mediated by factors related to the pain condition rather than the pharmacologic effect per se.

Efficacy of ibuprofen and codeine + paracetamol to reduce immediate bleaching sensitivity caused by in-office tooth bleaching: A randomized, controlled, double-blind clinical trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate (1) the efficacy of Ibuprofen and codeine + paracetamol to control immediate bleaching sensitivity caused by in-office tooth bleaching performed with 35% hydrogen peroxide, and (2) tooth shade change caused by 35% hydrogen peroxide.

METHODS

In this randomized, controlled and double blind clinical trial, 60 volunteers were divided into three treatment groups: 400 mg placebo (PL)(n=20), 400 mg ibuprofen (IB)(n=20), or 30 mg codeine + 500 mg paracetamol (CP)(n=20). The volunteers were submitted to two bleaching sessions with 35% hydrogen peroxide in 2 applications of 20 minutes each. In both sessions, the medication was given to the volunteers 1 hour before the bleaching procedure. The sensitivity values were obtained with the analogic visual pain scale. Tooth shade was assessed before and after bleaching. Statistical analysis was done through the one-way ANOVA and Tukey post-hoc tests.

RESULTS

For bleaching sensitivity, there were statistically significant differences among the medications (P< 0.01). The lowest sensitivity means were found in the CP group (PL:4.7 = IB:4.8 > CP:1.0). In regards to tooth shade, participant's teeth were statistically significantly lighter after bleaching than before bleaching (P< 0.01), with no statistically significant difference between the medications (P< 0.05).

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The use of codeine + paracetamol 1 hour before in-office tooth bleaching can drastically reduce immediate sensitivity.

Comparison of Codeine Phosphate and Morphine Sulphate in Infants Undergoing Cleft Palate Repair

Objective:

To ascertain the quality of analgesia provided by morphine in comparison to codeine.

Design:

The study is a prospective, randomized, double-blind trial of analgesic effect employing validated pain scores.

Patients:

Infants having primary cleft palate repair with informed parental consent to enter the study.

Interventions:

Infants received one of two analgesics intraoperatively for immediate postoperative pain relief. Morphine was given by intravenous injection and codeine by the intramuscular route.

Main Outcome Measure:

Pain scores in the immediate postoperative period for 2 hours following surgery; this outcome measure was decided prior to data collection.

Results:

The pain score and other outcome measures were all blinded. Measurements are all evident from the nature of the results.

Conclusions:

There was no clinically significant difference observed in the analgesic effect of either drug on the two groups studied.

Effect of a Single Dose of Oral Opioid and Nonopioid Analgesics on Acute Extremity Pain in the Emergency Department: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

The choice of analgesic to treat acute pain in the emergency department (ED) lacks a clear evidence base. The combination of ibuprofen and acetaminophen (paracetamol) may represent a viable nonopioid alternative.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy of 4 oral analgesics.

DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS

Randomized clinical trial conducted at 2 urban EDs in the Bronx, New York, that included 416 patients aged 21 to 64 years with moderate to severe acute extremity pain enrolled from July 2015 to August 2016.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants (104 per each combination analgesic group) received 400 mg of ibuprofen and 1000 mg of acetaminophen; 5 mg of oxycodone and 325 mg of acetaminophen; 5 mg of hydrocodone and 300 mg of acetaminophen; or 30 mg of codeine and 300 mg of acetaminophen.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the between-group difference in decline in pain 2 hours after ingestion. Pain intensity was assessed using an 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS), in which 0 indicates no pain and 10 indicates the worst possible pain. The predefined minimum clinically important difference was 1.3 on the NRS. Analysis of variance was used to test the overall between-group difference at P = .05 and 99.2% CIs adjusted for multiple pairwise comparisons.

RESULTS

Of 416 patients randomized, 411 were analyzed (mean [SD] age, 37 [12] years; 199 [48%] women; 247 [60%] Latino). The baseline mean NRS pain score was 8.7 (SD, 1.3). At 2 hours, the mean NRS pain score decreased by 4.3 (95% CI, 3.6 to 4.9) in the ibuprofen and acetaminophen group; by 4.4 (95% CI, 3.7 to 5.0) in the oxycodone and acetaminophen group; by 3.5 (95% CI, 2.9 to 4.2) in the hydrocodone and acetaminophen group; and by 3.9 (95% CI, 3.2 to 4.5) in the codeine and acetaminophen group (P = .053). The largest difference in decline in the NRS pain score from baseline to 2 hours was between the oxycodone and acetaminophen group and the hydrocodone and acetaminophen group (0.9; 99.2% CI, -0.1 to 1.8), which was less than the minimum clinically important difference in NRS pain score of 1.3. Adverse events were not assessed.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

For patients presenting to the ED with acute extremity pain, there were no statistically significant or clinically important differences in pain reduction at 2 hours among single-dose treatment with ibuprofen and acetaminophen or with 3 different opioid and acetaminophen combination analgesics. Further research to assess adverse events and other dosing may be warranted.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02455518.

Opioids for cancer pain - an overview of Cochrane reviews

BACKGROUND

Pain is a common symptom with cancer, and 30% to 50% of all people with cancer will experience moderate to severe pain that can have a major negative impact on their quality of life. Opioid (morphine-like) drugs are commonly used to treat moderate or severe cancer pain, and are recommended for this purpose in the World Health Organization (WHO) pain treatment ladder. The most commonly-used opioid drugs are buprenorphine, codeine, fentanyl, hydrocodone, hydromorphone, methadone, morphine, oxycodone, tramadol, and tapentadol.

OBJECTIVES

To provide an overview of the analgesic efficacy of opioids in cancer pain, and to report on adverse events associated with their use.

METHODS

We identified systematic reviews examining any opioid for cancer pain published to 4 May 2017 in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews in the Cochrane Library. The primary outcomes were no or mild pain within 14 days of starting treatment, withdrawals due to adverse events, and serious adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine reviews with 152 included studies and 13,524 participants, but because some studies appeared in more than one review the number of unique studies and participants was smaller than this. Most participants had moderate or severe pain associated with a range of different types of cancer. Studies in the reviews typically compared one type of opioid or formulation with either a different formulation of the same opioid, or a different opioid; few included a placebo control. Typically the reviews titrated dose to effect, a balance between pain relief and adverse events. Various routes of administration of opioids were considered in the reviews; oral with most opioids, but transdermal administration with fentanyl, and buprenorphine. No review included studies of subcutaneous opioid administration. Pain outcomes reported were varied and inconsistent. The average size of included studies varied considerably between reviews: studies of older opioids, such as codeine, morphine, and methadone, had low average study sizes while those involving newer drugs tended to have larger study sizes.Six reviews reported a GRADE assessment (buprenorphine, codeine, hydromorphone, methadone, oxycodone, and tramadol), but not necessarily for all comparisons or outcomes. No comparative analyses were possible because there was no consistent placebo or active control. Cohort outcomes for opioids are therefore reported, as absolute numbers or percentages, or both.Reviews on buprenorphine, codeine with or without paracetamol, hydromorphone, methadone, tramadol with or without paracetamol, tapentadol, and oxycodone did not have information about the primary outcome of mild or no pain at 14 days, although that on oxycodone indicated that average pain scores were within that range. Two reviews, on oral morphine and transdermal fentanyl, reported that 96% of 850 participants achieved that goal.Adverse event withdrawal was reported by five reviews, at rates of between 6% and 19%. Participants with at least one adverse event were reported by three reviews, at rates of between 11% and 77%.Our GRADE assessment of evidence quality was very low for all outcomes, because many studies in the reviews were at high risk of bias from several sources, including small study size.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The amount and quality of evidence around the use of opioids for treating cancer pain is disappointingly low, although the evidence we have indicates that around 19 out of 20 people with moderate or severe pain who are given opioids and can tolerate them should have that pain reduced to mild or no pain within 14 days. This accords with the clinical experience in treating many people with cancer pain, but overstates to some extent the effectiveness found for the WHO pain ladder. Most people will experience adverse events, and help may be needed to manage the more common undesirable adverse effects such as constipation and nausea. Perhaps between 1 in 10 and 2 in 10 people treated with opioids will find these adverse events intolerable, leading to a change in treatment.

Regular use of acetaminophen or acetaminophen-codeine combinations and prescription of rescue therapy with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: a population-based study in primary care

OBJECTIVE

There are contrasting positions concerning the benefit-risk ratio of acetaminophen use for osteoarthritis (OA)-related pain. To clarify the effectiveness of acetaminophen or acetaminophen-codeine combinations according to their regimen of use, we evaluated whether being a regular user (adherent) of these medications decreased the occurrence of rescue therapy with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).

METHODS

Using the Health Search IMS Health Longitudinal Patient Database, we formed a cohort of patients aged ≥18 years and newly treated with acetaminophen or acetaminophen-codeine combinations for OA between 1 January 2001 and 31 December 2013. These patients were followed up for one year in which they were categorized as regular or irregular users of these medications according to a variable medication possession ratio (VMPR) ≥ 50% or lower. We operationally defined the rescue therapy as the use of any NSAIDs prescribed for OA-related pain.

RESULTS

Overall, 40,029 patients (69.5% females; mean age: 68 ± 13.57) treated with acetaminophen or acetaminophen-codeine combinations formed the cohort. After the first year of treatment, regular users showed a statistically significantly lower risk of being prescribed with rescue therapy with NSAIDs (OR = 0.89; 95% CI 0.84-0.96).

CONCLUSION

These findings show that regular use of acetaminophen or acetaminophen-codeine combinations may reduce the need for NSAIDs to treat OA-related pain.

"Codeine Is My Helper": Misuse of and Dependence on Codeine-Containing Medicines in South Africa

Misuse of codeine-containing medicines is an emerging global public health concern. The majority of research has been conducted in developed countries (European Members States, Australia, the United States). This study aimed to gain an understanding of unique individual and collective experiences of trajectories of codeine misuse and dependence in South Africa. In-depth interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of adult codeine misusers and dependents ( n = 25). Narratives were analyzed using the empirical phenomenological psychological five-step method. Nine themes with 63 categories emerged, with two additional high levels of abstraction. Findings are illustrated: participant profile and product preferences, motives for use, transitioning to misuse and dependence, pharmacy purchasing and alternative sourcing routes, effects and withdrawal experiences, help-seeking and treatment experiences, and strategies for prevention. The study underscores the need for continued support for enhanced patient awareness of risk of habit forming use and related health consequences and professional pharmacovigilance.

Clinical update on benefit versus risks of oral paracetamol alone or with codeine: still a good option?

BACKGROUND

After decades of worldwide use of paracetamol/acetaminophen as a popular and apparently safe prescription and over-the-counter medicine, the future role of this poorly understood analgesic has been seriously questioned by recent concerns about prenatal, cardiovascular (CV) and hepatic safety, and also about its analgesic efficacy. At the same time the usefulness of codeine in combination products has come under debate.

METHODS

Based on a PubMed database literature search on the terms efficacy, safety, paracetamol, acetaminophen, codeine and their combinations up to and including June 2016, this clinical update reviews the current evidence of the benefit and risks of oral paracetamol alone and with codeine for mild-to-moderate pain in adults, and compares the respective efficacy and safety profiles with those of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).

RESULTS

Whereas there is a clear strong association of NSAID use and gastrointestinal (GI) and CV morbidity and mortality, evidence for paracetamol with and without codeine supports the recommended use even in most vulnerable individuals, such as the elderly, pregnant women, alcoholics, and compromised GI and CV patients. The controversies and widespread misconceptions about the complex hepatic metabolism and potential hepatotoxicity have been corrected by recent reviews, and paracetamol remains the first-line nonopioid analgesic in patients with liver diseases if notes of caution are applied.

CONCLUSION

Due to its safety and tolerability profile paracetamol remained a first-line treatment in many international guidelines. Alone and with codeine it is a safe and effective option in adults, whilst NSAIDs are obviously less safe as alternatives, given the risk of potentially fatal GI and CV adverse effects.

Reliable evidence for efficacy of single dose oral analgesics

Data sourcesThe Cochrane library was searched for Cochrane systematic reviews.Study selectionCochrane reviews on single pain medications for the treatment of acute pain were included. Non-Cochrane reviews were included for tramadol.Data extraction and synthesisTwo reviewers independently searched, selected reviews for inclusion, assessed quality and performed data extraction. A protocol in case of disagreement was in place. Data were collected on number of included studies and participants, drug, dose and formulation and pain model. The authors concentrated on the amount of information and the potential for publication bias.Pain relief was calculated using at least 50% maximum pain relief, as a percentage, and as NNTs. Duration of analgesia was measured as mean or median and time to remedication was calculated as percentage of patients.ResultsThirty-nine reviews including 41 interventions were analysed and NNTs for at least 50% maximum pain relief were summarised in a graphic. NNTs range from almost one all the way to five. Only one intervention, codeine 60, had an NNT ≥10. Results judged to be reliable were listed in detail. Mean or median time to remedication was also presented in a graphic.The authors conclude that there is a great amount of quality information on single dose analgesics, and highlighted the potential benefit of fast acting formulations and fixed formulations to achieve good long-lasting analgesia.ConclusionsThere is a wealth of reliable evidence on the analgesic efficacy of single dose oral analgesics. Fast acting formulations and fixed dose combinations of analgesics can produce good and often long-lasting analgesia at relatively low doses. There is also important information on drugs for which there are no data, inadequate data, or where results are unreliable due to susceptibility to publication bias. This should inform choices by professionals and consumers.

Nonmedical Use of Cough Syrup Among Secondary Vocational School Students: A National Survey in China

Nonmedical use of cough syrup (NUCS) among secondary vocational school (SVS) students has been an increasing concern for public health in China, but no data were available. This cross-sectional study aimed to investigate the epidemiological characters of NUCS as well as its risk factors among SVS students in China.From September 2013 to December 2014, a total of 13,614 SVS students were purposively selected through multistage sampling in 6 cities of China. Information on NUCS, demographics, family background, smoking and alcohol consumption, impulsiveness, sensation seeking, and parental monitoring were collected. Logistic regression was used to explore factors related to NUCS.The 12,923 (94.9%) valid responses (16.3 ± 1.0 years old, and 52.6% men) reported 3.47% (95% confidence interval: 3.15-3.79%) lifetime NUCS. Logistic regression indicated that smoking, part-time job experience, high level of impulsiveness, and sensation seeking were risk factors for NUCS, whereas urban living and high parental monitoring were protective ones.NUCS was prevalent among SVS students. Interventions that target on smoking, impulsiveness and sensation seeking control, improvement on parental monitoring may have considerable impact on NUCS among SVS students.

7.0 T high-resolution 1H-MR spectroscopy of metabolic changes induced by chronic codeine phosphate in rat hippocampus

Codeine phosphate is used widely to treat cough and pain. It is actually a sedative, but is known to cause codeine dependence. The exact mechanisms of codeine dependence are not fully understood, but are generally believed to be related to drug-induced neuroadaptation. Metabolites changes can provide information for pathological processes and mechanisms before the shape change. It is very useful for the diagnosis and treatment of drug addiction. We used H NMR spectroscopy in vivo to measure the concentrations of cerebral metabolites in the hippocampus of rats subjected to repeated codeine treatment. After 2 months of codeine treatment, the concentration of N-acetylaspartate was significantly decreased in hippocampi, as was that of glutamate, choline, and taurine. Our study highlights the potential use of metabolic profiling to enhance our understanding of metabolite alteration associated with codeine dependence.

[Clinical observation of auricular point sticking combined with western medicine for preventing and treating postoperative complications of external excision and internal ligation on mixed hemorrhoid]

OBJECTIVE

To explore the effect of auricular point sticking before operation for postoperative complications of external excision and internal ligation on mixed hemorrhoid.

METHODS

Eighty patients with mixed hemorrhoid were randomly divided into an observation group and a control group, 40 cases in each group. In the control group, paracetamol and dihydrocodeine tartrate tablets were applied with oral administration 1 h after operation, 510 mg each time, twice a day; at the same time, diosmin tablets were treated with oral administration, 0.9 g each time, twice a day. Three days' treatments were required successively. In the observation group, auricular point sticking was used before operation based on the treatment in the control group. The auricular points of Shen (Co10), Pangguang (CO9), Shenmen (TF4), Pizhixia (AT4), Jiaogan (AH6a) and Gangmen (HX5) were selected. The patients were asked to press the points 3-6 times per day, 3-5 min each time, 3 days' treatment in total. The scores of the postoperative complications in the 1st and the 2nd days were compared between the two groups such as pain, edema, hematochezia, retention of urine, etc.

RESULTS

After operation, the scores of pain, edema, hematochezia, retention of urine in the 2nd day were all decreased obviously than those in the 1st day in the two groups (all P<0.05); and the scores of pain, edema, hematochezia, retention of urine in the 1st and the 2nd days of the observation group were lower than those in the control group (all P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Auricular point sticking before operation combined with conventional western medicine with oral administration for preventing and treating postoperative complications of external excision and internal ligation on mixed hemorrhoid achieves positive and reliable efficacy.

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

BACKGROUND

This is an update of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 3, 2013. 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 effects 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. Some combinations of ibuprofen and codeine are available without prescription (but usually only from a pharmacy) where the dose of codeine is lower, and with a prescription when the dose of codeine is higher.Use of combination analgesics that contain codeine has been a source of some concern because of misuse from over-the-counter preparations.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of a single oral dose of ibuprofen plus codeine for acute 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, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the reference lists of articles. The date of the most recent search was 1 December 2014.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double-blind, placebo- or active-controlled clinical trials of single dose oral ibuprofen plus codeine 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 prescribed ibuprofen plus codeine, placebo, or the same dose of ibuprofen alone with at least 50% pain relief over six hours, using validated equations. 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. Analyses were planned for different doses of ibuprofen and codeine, but especially for codeine where we set criteria for low (< 10 mg), medium (10 to 20 mg), and high (> 20 mg) doses.

MAIN RESULTS

Since the last version of this review no new studies were found. Information was available from six studies with 1342 participants, using a variety of doses of ibuprofen and codeine. In four studies (443 participants) using ibuprofen 400 mg plus codeine 25.6 mg to 60 mg (high dose codeine) 64% of participants had at least 50% maximum pain relief with the combination compared to 18% with placebo. The NNT was 2.2 (95% confidence interval 1.8 to 2.6) (high quality evidence). In three studies (204 participants) ibuprofen plus codeine (any dose) was better than the same dose of ibuprofen (69% versus 55%) but the result was barely significant with a relative benefit of 1.3 (1.01 to 1.6) (moderate quality evidence). In two studies (159 participants) ibuprofen plus codeine appeared to be better than the same dose of codeine alone (69% versus 33%), but no analysis was done. There was no difference between the combination and placebo in the reporting of adverse events in these acute studies (moderate quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The combination of ibuprofen 400 mg plus codeine 25.6 mg to 60 mg demonstrates good analgesic efficacy. Very limited data suggest that the combination is better than the same dose of either drug alone, and that similar numbers of people experience adverse events with the combination as with placebo.

A look inside the association codeine-paracetamol: clinical pharmacology supports analgesic efficacy

Acute and chronic pain often requires a multimodal approach. Combination therapy reduces the number of individual daily administrations and improves patient's compliance with the prescribed analgesic treatment. Despite the association codeine/paracetamol is one of the most widely used central analgesic, the exact mechanism of action, particularly of paracetamol, is still object of pharmacological research. Recent findings showed that paracetamol may act through cerebral cyclo-oxygenase, descending opioidergic inhibitory pathways, serotonin pathway, and the endocannabinoid system; while codeine activity seems to related not only to its conversion to morphine, as previously known, but also by itself and through its metabolites, such as norcodeine (NORC) and codeine-6-glucuronide (C-6-G). The addition of codeine to paracetamol significantly improves the analgesic action and reduces the number needed to treat (NNT) from 5 to 2.3-3.1. Recent warnings about the risk of its metabolism related to CYP450 and its genetic variability in general population should be mainly considered when the association is used in paediatric patients undergoing tonsillectomy and/or adenoidectomy procedures for obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome (OSAS). In adults, the association codeine/paracetamol has been shown to be effective and safe in different settings: acute pain, trauma patients, and chronic nociceptive pain.

[Paracetamol-codeine, an always actual choice for the treatment of pain]

Acute pain of mild to moderate intensity is one of the problems most frequently encountered in primary care and emergency medicine and is a major reason of request for visit by patients. In recent years the focus has been more on the treatment of chronic pain, perhaps ignoring the negative impact of acute pain on quality of life and functional status of the patient, despite a growing number of evidence indicating the need to treat optimally also acute pain to avoid it prolongs in time. The remarkable progress achieved in the understanding of the physiological mechanisms of the nociceptive stimulus, as well as those common to biochemical inflammation and acute pain, highlighted the active and complex role of central nervous system in the genesis and maintenance of pain that from acute, if not promptly and adequately treated, can become chronic. In this article, after a brief introduction on the most recent advances on the transition from acute to chronic pain, we have focused on paracetamol, an analgesic drug widely used for over a century for its demonstrated efficacy and tolerability. Paracetamol that, thanks to a complex and not yet fully defined mechanism of action, certainly localized in the central nervous system, can have a significant role in the early treatment of acute pain aimed to reduce the risk of chronicization. Pharmacokinetic parameters and pharmacodynamic studies are outlined, as well as the latest acquisitions in terms of metabolism of this drug and the risks related to its misuse. Are also discussed the recommendations issued by scientific societies and recent articles that indicate paracetamol as the drug of first choice for mild to moderate pain in various clinical settings, such as post-operative pain, post-traumatic and osteoarticular diseases, alone or in association with weak opioids, in particular with codeine. Most recent findings about metabolism and analgesic effect of codeine and its metabolites are highlighted, and how, in combination with acetaminophen, there is an increase in analgesic efficacy without increasing side effects, offering the chance of obtaining a better pain control.

Comparison of the postoperative analgesic effects of naproxen sodium and naproxen sodium-codeine phosphate for arthroscopic meniscus surgery

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are frequently used to control arthroscopic pain. Addition of oral effective opioid "codeine" to NSAIDs may be more effective and decrease parenteral opioid consumption in the postoperative period. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and side effects of naproxen sodium and a new preparation naproxen sodium-codeine phosphate when administered preemptively for arthroscopic meniscectomy.

METHODS

Sixty-one patients were randomized into two groups to receive either oral naproxen sodium (Group N) or naproxen sodium-codeine phosphate (Group NC) before surgery. The surgery was carried out under general anesthesia. Intravenous meperidine was initiated by patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) for all patients. The primary outcome measure was pain score at the first postoperative hour assessed by the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Sedation assessed by Ramsey Sedation Scale, first demand time of PCA, postoperative meperidine consumption, side effects and hemodynamic data were also recorded.

RESULTS

The groups were demographically comparable. Median VAS scores both at rest and on movement were significantly lower in Group NC compared with Group N, except 18(th) hour on movement (p<0.05). The median time to the first demand of PCA was shorter in Group N compared with Group NC (p<0.001). Meperidine consumption was higher in Group N compared with Group NC (p<0.001). There was no difference between groups with respect to side effects (p>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of naproxen sodium-codeine phosphate provided more effective analgesia than naproxen sodium and did not increase side effects.

Paracetamol-codeine compared to ketorolac for pain control in the Emergency Department

OBJECTIVE

Paracetamol /codeine has shown a strong analgesic activity in several studies conducted among different kind of subjects, including those with trauma. Nevertheless, its efficacy in patients accessing the Emergency Department (ED) for different kind of pain has never been tested.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This is a cross-sectional, observational, prospective, cohort study. Inclusion criteria were patients > 18 year old presenting to the ED for localized traumatic or inflammatory pain involving only extremities. Numeric scale (NRS) was recorded thirty minutes and two hours after the administration of the analgesic therapy, consisting of 15 mg of ketorolac or 1000 mg/60 mg of paracetamol/ codeine, both orally.

RESULTS

Two-hundred patients were consecutively enrolled; 87 were treated with paracetamol/codeine and 113 with ketorolac. The combination paracetamol/codeine resulted to be not inferior to ketorolac in non-traumatic pain group and trauma group (p = 0.635 and p = 0.482, respectively). Compared to ketorolac, the combination paracetamol/codeine exerted a significantly higher analgesic activity in patients with fractures and muscular pain (p = 0.044) and was more effective in acute pain (p = 0.002), with a significant effect two hours after the administration (p = 0.029).

CONCLUSIONS

Paracetamol/codeine is equivalent to ketorolac in non-traumatic pain and post-traumatic pain, but is superior in acute pain and in patients with fractures and muscular pain. Those results play in favor of the use of the combination paracetamol/codeine in patients accessing the ED for non-traumatic or traumatic pain of the extremities.

Avoiding narcotic analgesics in young children

Recent warnings regarding the use of codeine in young children have triggered changes in postoperative pain management with a trend toward over the counter pain medicines. A summary of the recent FDA warnings and current pain protocols is contained within.

Clinical practice guideline: CYP2D6 genotyping for safe and efficacious codeine therapy

This guideline is intended to provide a basis for informed decision-making regarding genetic testing to identify those individuals who will not benefit from codeine therapy, as well as those who are at an increased risk for codeine-induced toxicity. This guideline addresses the following key questions: 1) Should genetic testing for CYP2D6 be performed in patients prior to the initiation of codeine therapy? 2) How should patients with an indication for codeine therapy be managed based on their genotyping results for CYP2D6?

Safety and efficacy of the combination acetaminophen-codeine in the treatment of pain of different origin

BACKGROUND

Pain is the most common reason people see doctors in developed Countries and a very common cause of access in Emergency Department (ED). The combination acetaminophen/codeine represents the standard medication in the second step of the WHO analgesic scale and codeine is one of the most commonly used opioid analgesic for a variety of pain conditions. However, many aspects related to safety and efficacy are still undefined.

AIM

To summarize and review the results of the most relevant studies on the efficacy and safety profile of acetaminophen/codeine combination in the treatment of pain of different origin.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a literature search to identify and evaluate all relevant english-language randomized controlled trials (RCTs), meta-analyses and reviews about the codeine plus paracetamol combination in the treatment of pain from any source.

RESULTS

Acetaminophen/codeine combination is effective in the treatment of moderate to severe pain in all setting analyzed in this study, which include headache, postoperative, osteoarticular and post-traumatic. The best results in terms of safety and efficacy have been obtained in postoperative pain. Efficacy of acetaminophen/codeine combination is not inferior to NSAIDs.

CONCLUSIONS

Acetaminophen/codeine combination is effective in the treatment of pain, through a synergistic action of the two molecules, and is not inferior to NSAIDs. Side effects of acetaminophen/codeine are usually minor, differently from NSAIDs, which may induce some potentially life threatening conditions.

Single dose oral ibuprofen plus codeine 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 effects 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. Some combinations of ibuprofen and codeine are available without prescription (but usually only from a pharmacy) where the dose of codeine is lower, and with a prescription when the dose of codeine is higher.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of a single oral dose of ibuprofen plus codeine for moderate to severe postoperative pain. We compared ibuprofen plus codeine with placebo and with the same dose of ibuprofen alone.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Oxford Pain Database, ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists of articles. The date of the most recent search was 30 September 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently considered trials for inclusion in the review, assessed quality, and extracted data. We used the area under the pain relief versus time curve to derive the proportion of participants prescribed ibuprofen plus codeine, placebo, or the same dose of ibuprofen alone with at least 50% pain relief over six hours, using validated equations. We calculated the relative risk (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. Analyses were planned for different doses of ibuprofen and codeine, but especially for codeine where we set criteria for low (< 10 mg), medium (10 to 20 mg), and high (> 20 mg) doses.

MAIN RESULTS

Information was available from six studies with 1342 participants, with a variety of doses of ibuprofen and codeine. In four studies (443 participants) using ibuprofen 400 mg plus codeine 25.6 to 60 mg (high dose codeine) 64% of participants had at least 50% maximum pain relief with the combination compared to 18% with placebo. The NNT was 2.2 (95% CI 1.8 to 2.6). In three studies (204 participants) ibuprofen plus codeine (any dose) was better than the same dose of ibuprofen (69% versus 55%) but the result was barely significant with a relative benefit of 1.3 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.6). In two studies (159 participants) ibuprofen plus codeine appeared to be better than the same dose of codeine alone (69% versus 33%), but no analysis was done. There was no difference between the combination and placebo in the reporting of adverse events in these acute studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The combination of ibuprofen 400 mg plus codeine 25.6 to 60 mg demonstrates good analgesic efficacy. Very limited data suggest that the combination is better than the same dose of either drug alone. Use of combination analgesics that contain codeine has been a source of some concern because of misuse from over-the-counter preparations.

A randomized evaluation of intravenous dexamethasone versus oral acetaminophen codeine in pediatric adenotonsillectomy: emergence agitation and analgesia

BACKGROUND

Adenotonsillectomy is the most frequently performed ambulatory surgical procedure in children. Post operative agitation and inadequate pain control, for children undergoing adenotonsillectomy, can be a challenge. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of intravenous dexamethasone and oral acetaminophen codeine on emergence agitation and pain after adenotonsillectomy in children.

METHODS

One hundred and five pediatric patients (3-7 years old), scheduled to undergo adenotonsillectomy under general anesthesia, were enrolled in the study. Thirty minutes before induction, patients were randomized to three groups. Group 1 received 0.2 mg/kg of intravenous dexamethasone and 0.25 ml/kg of oral placebo syrup. Group 2 received 20 mg/kg of oral acetaminophen codeine syrup and 0.05 ml/kg of intravenous saline. Group 3 received 0.25 ml/kg of oral placebo syrup and 0.05 ml/kg of intravenous saline. Emergence agitation and postoperative pain were assessed, recorded and compared.

RESULT

Agitation was less frequent in dexamethasone and acetaminophen codeine groups in comparison with placebo group, but there were not significant differences between the two groups. The pain frequencies in the three groups were not significantly different.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study suggest that the administration of intravenous dexamethasone (0.2 mg/kg) and oral acetaminophen codeine (20 mg/kg) thirty minutes before anesthesia can significantly decrease the incidence and severity of agitation but does not have an effect on postoperative pain.

Examination of the interaction between peripheral lumiracoxib and opioids on the 1% formalin test in rats

It has been shown that the association of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) with opioid analgesic agents can increase their antinociceptive activity, allowing the use of lower doses and thus limiting side effects. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to examine the possible pharmacological interaction between lumiracoxib and codeine or nalbuphine at the local peripheral level in the rat using the 1% formalin test and isobolographic analysis. Lumiracoxib, codeine, nalbuphine or fixed-dose ratios lumiracoxib-codeine or lumiracoxib-nalbuphine combinations were administrated locally in the formalin-injured paw and the antinociceptive effect was evaluated using the 1% formalin test. All treatments produced a dose-dependent antinociceptive effect. ED(40) values were estimated for the individual drugs and an isobologram was constructed. The derived theoretical ED(40)'s for the lumiracoxib-codeine and lumiracoxib-nalbuphine combinations were 423.4+/-31.3 microg/paw and 310.9+/-24.2 microg/paw, respectively, being significantly higher than the actually observed experimental ED(40) values, 233.2+/-30.9 microg/paw and 132.7+/-11.6 microg/paw, respectively. These results correspond to a synergistic interaction between lumiracoxib and opioids at the local peripheral level, potency being about two times higher with regard to that expected from the addition of the effects of the individual drugs. Data suggest that low doses of the lumiracoxib-opioids combination can interact synergistically at the peripheral level and therefore this drug association may represent a therapeutic advantage for the clinical treatment of inflammatory pain.

[Drug synergism in analgesia treated with ibuprofen and codeine]

One of the principal characteristics of a good pharmacological combination is drug synergism. A new analgesic combination of ibuprofen, a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug, used frequently in clinical practice due to good quotient of efficacy and safety, and codeine, a minor opiate used very much as second analgesic step in combination, has recently come on the market. We have conducted a review in MEDLINE of the principal studies published in the medical literature as regards the efficacy and safety of both drugs separately and finally, a review of the clinical experience showed in studies with analgesic combinations in general and on the hypothesis of a possible drug synergism between NSAIDs and Opiates.

Modification by L-NAME of Codeine Induced Analgesia: Possible Role of Nitric Oxide

Objectives were to investigate the effect of nonselective nitric oxide synthase (NOS) inhibitor, L-NAME on codeine-induced analgesia and to see the role of NO in its antinociceptive effect. Also, to see if L-NAME can potentiate the antinociceptive response of sub-effective dose of codeine and to explore if opioid receptors have some role to play in L-NAME effects. Mice were injected with selected doses of codeine or other selected agents intraperitoneally and the latency to hot plate was recorded at zero, 15, 30, and 60 min of the treatments. The antinociceptive response of codeine (10 mg/kg, i.p.) was studied in comparison to those of the NOS inhibitor, L-NAME, and of nitric oxide donor, sodium nitroprusside (SNP). Assessment of nitrates and nitrites (NOx) in the sera of treated mice were also made. Codeine (20 mg/kg dose), induced analgesia significantly and dose dependently only after 15 min. L-NAME at 20, 40, and 80 mg/kg dose levels significantly changed the nonanalgesic effect of codeine (10 mg/kg) to highly significant analgesia. The effect of L-NAME 40 mg/kg was significantly higher than the other two doses and was almost equal to that of the higher dose of codeine. Naloxone itself did not show any intrinsic effect but almost abolished the L-NAME-codeine induced analgesia. Similarly, SNP (1 mg/kg) reversed the decrease in reaction time by L-NAME-codeine to its control values, significantly. Pretreatment with L-NAME rendered the nonanalgesic dose of codeine significantly analgesic almost in an equal potency to the high dose of codeine alone and indicate that the NO modulatory effect on the opioid analgesic codeine is probably, at least in part, through opioid receptors.

Decreased striatal dopamine transporters in codeine-containing cough syrup abusers

BACKGROUND

In recent years, codeine-containing cough syrups (CCS) have been reported as substances of abuse, especially in adolescents. Chronic CCS abuse can induce physical and psychological dependence. However, the potential brain impairment caused by chronic CCS abuse has not been reported previously. The present study was designed to determine if the striatal dopamine transporter (DAT) levels measured by (99m)Tc-TRODAT-1 single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) brain scans were altered in CCS-dependent subjects and to explore the CCS-caused brain impairment.

METHODS

SPECT brain scans were acquired on 22 CCS-dependent subjects and 27 healthy age matched controls. The volume (V) and weight (W) of bilateral corpus striatum as well as the (99m)Tc-TRODAT-1 uptake ratio of corpus striatum/the whole brain (Ra) were calculated using mathematical models.

RESULTS

It was displayed that DAT availability of striatum was significantly decreased and the V, W and Ra were greatly reduced in the CCS-dependent group compared to controls (for each comparison p<0.01).

CONCLUSION

Taken together, these results suggest that chronic CCS abuse may cause serious damage to the brain and the neuroimaging findings further illustrate the mechanism of CCS dependence.

Canadian guideline for safe and effective use of opioids for chronic noncancer pain: clinical summary for family physicians. Part 1: general population

OBJECTIVE

To provide family physicians with a practical clinical summary of the Canadian Guideline for Safe and Effective Use of Opioids for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain, developed by the National Opioid Use Guideline Group.

QUALITY OF EVIDENCE

Researchers for the guideline conducted a systematic review of the literature on the effectiveness and safety of opioids for chronic noncancer pain, and drafted a series of recommendations. A panel of 49 clinicians from across Canada reviewed the draft and achieved consensus on 24 recommendations.

MAIN MESSAGE

Screening for addiction risk is recommended before prescribing opioids. Weak opioids (codeine and tramadol) are recommended for mild to moderate pain that has not responded to first-line treatments. Oxycodone, hydromorphone, and morphine can be tried in patients who have not responded to weaker opioids. A low initial dose and slow upward titration is recommended, with patient education and close monitoring. Physicians should watch for the development of complications such as sleep apnea. The optimal dose is one which improves function or decreases pain ratings by at least 30%. For by far most patients, the optimal dose will be well below a 200-mg morphine equivalent dose per day. Tapering is recommended for patients who have not responded to an adequate opioid trial.

CONCLUSION

Opioids play an important role in the management of chronic noncancer pain, but careful prescribing is needed to limit potential harms. The new Canadian guideline provides much-needed guidance to help physicians achieve a balance between optimal pain control and safety.

Where are the new cough treatments: a debriefing of recent clinical proof-of-concept trials with the NOP agonist SCH 486757

Cough continues to be one of the top reasons why patients seek medical attention from health care providers. The prescription antitussive market is dominated by opioids, such as codeine that produces inconsistent efficacy and is often accompanied by significant side effect liabilities. Consequently, cough represents an unmet medical need and an underserved market. Yet, against the backdrop of increasing cough research, the development of novel treatments has been exceptionally challenging with dextromethorphan being the last US drug approved for cough almost a half century ago. We support the position that an unambiguous and actionable 'road map' that clearly delineates the pathway forward for new cough suppressants from basic research to and beyond clinical proof-of-concept studies will be an important aspect for future success of this pharmacological class of drug. Pivotal to the establishment of such a road map will be the review of lessons learned from antitussive agents that have been recently progressed to proof-of-concept trials. In the present commentary, we briefly discuss observations and challenges pertaining to SCH 486757, a selective orally active NOP agonist that has recently advanced to human antitussive testing.

Single dose oral fenoprofen for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Fenoprofen is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID), available in several different countries, but not widely used.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of single dose oral fenoprofen in acute postoperative pain, and associated adverse events.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Oxford Pain Relief Database for studies to December 2010.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Single oral dose, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of fenoprofen for relief of established moderate to severe postoperative pain in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Studies were assessed for methodological quality and data extracted by two review authors independently. Summed total pain relief (TOTPAR) or pain intensity difference (SPID) over 4 to 6 hours was used to calculate the number of participants achieving at least 50% pain relief. These derived results were used to calculate, with 95% confidence intervals, the relative benefit compared to placebo, and the number needed to treat (NNT) for one participant to experience at least 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours. 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 was collected.

MAIN RESULTS

Five studies (696 participants) met the inclusion criteria; 24 participants were treated with fenoprofen 12.5 mg, 23 with fenoprofen 25 mg, 79 with fenoprofen 50 mg, 78 with fenoprofen 100 mg, 146 with fenoprofen 200 mg, 55 with fenoprofen 300 mg, 43 with zomepirac 100 mg, 30 with morphine 8 mg, 77 with codeine 60 mg, and 141 with placebo. Participants had pain following third molar extraction, laparoscopy, minor day surgery and episiotomy. The NNT for at least 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours with a single dose of fenoprofen 200 mg compared to placebo was 2.3 (1.9 to 3.0). There were insufficient data to analyse other doses or active comparators, time to use of rescue medication, or numbers of participants needing rescue medication. There was no difference in numbers of participants experiencing any adverse events between fenoprofen 200 mg and placebo. No serious adverse events or adverse event withdrawals were reported in these studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Oral fenoprofen 200 mg is effective at treating moderate to severe acute postoperative pain, based on limited data for at least 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours. Efficacy of other doses, other efficacy outcomes, and safety and tolerability could not be assessed.

Analgesia with paracetamol/tramadol vs. paracetamol/codeine in one day-surgery: a randomized open study

OBJECTIVES

The analgesic efficacy of two fixed combinations of tramadol/paracetamol (TP 37.5/325 mg) and codeine/paracetamol (CP 30/500 mg) was compared in 122 patients undergoing one-day surgical procedures (hallux valgus, haemorrhoidectomy, varicectomy and inguinal hernia repair), randomly treated with TP 37.5/325 mg or CP 30/500 mg one tablet after surgery ended, followed by one tablet four times daily for 48 hours.

METHODS

Pain was assessed by a Verbal Rating Scale (VRS). Whenever the VRS score was > or = 3, the patient was given a "rescue medication" (tramadol 50 mg s.c.). The quality of life (time to return to normal daily activities, nightly rest, appetite, mood, deambulation, and self-care) was assessed in the postoperative period. Patients were asked to give their judgment on the surgical procedure and postoperative outcome.

RESULTS

The results indicate that TP 37.5/325 mg was superior to CP 30/500 mg in terms of higher analgesic efficacy (VSR at 24 hours: CP 30/500, 2.52 +/- 0.86 vs. TP 37.5/325, 1.40 +/- 0.76; p < 0.001), less patients reporting adverse events (CP 30/500: 62% vs. TP 37.5/325: 36%; p < 0.01), less patients requiring rescue medications (CP 30/500: 18.2% vs. TP 37.5/325: 5.5%; p < 0.01), and more favorable judgment (scored "excellent" by 16% and 54.5% of CP 30/500 or TP 37.5/325-treated patients, respectively; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that a fixed association of tramadol/paracetamol is a valuable and safe tool for pain management in day hospital surgery, especially whenever any effort is done to reduce the time for hospitalization.