Single-dose intravenous ketorolac for acute postoperative pain in adults

Non-Opioid Analgesics and Adjuvants after Surgery in Adults with Obesity: Systematic Review with Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background/Objectives: Managing postoperative pain in patients with obesity is challenging. Although using a combination of pain relief methods is recommended for these patients, the true effectiveness of various intravenous non-opioid analgesics and adjuvants in multimodal anesthesia needs to be better defined. Methods: A systematic review and network meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), acetaminophen, ketamine, α-2 agonists, lidocaine, magnesium, and oral gabapentinoids in adult surgical patients with obesity. The analysis aimed to compare these treatments to a placebo/no treatment or alternative analgesics, with a primary focus on postoperative pain and secondary endpoints including rescue analgesia, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), and recovery quality. English-language randomized controlled trials across PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, and EMBASE were considered. Quality and evidence certainty were assessed with the RoB 2 tool and GRADE, and data was analyzed with R software. Results: NSAIDs, along with acetaminophen, lidocaine, α-2 agonists, ketamine, and oral gabapentinoids, effectively reduce early postoperative pain. NSAIDs, particularly ibuprofen, as well as acetaminophen, ketamine, and lidocaine, also show benefits in later postoperative stages. Intravenous non-opioid analgesics and adjuvants show some degree of benefit in reducing PONV and the need for rescue analgesic therapy when using α-2 agonists alone or combined with oral gabapentinoids, notably decreasing the likelihood of PONV. Ketamine, lidocaine, and α-2 agonists are shown to enhance postoperative recovery and care quality. Conclusions: Intravenous non-opioid analgesics and adjuvants are valuable in multimodal anesthesia for pain management in adult surgical patients suffering from obesity.

Thermal imaging of local skin temperature as part of quality and safety assessment of injectable drugs

Injection of high-quality drugs can occasionally cause unexpected and unexplained local complications. As the current standard for drug quality control does not include an assessment of the local irritation effects of drugs, this effect may cause postinjection complications. Simultaneously, local irritation effects of the drugs can be assessed based on local tissue inflammation. The dynamics of local temperature can assess inflammation. Infrared monitoring of local skin temperature dynamics at subcutaneous, intramuscular, and intravenous injection sites of drugs under experimental and clinical conditions can improve their quality and safety. Therefore, there is a need to include dynamic thermography in the standard of biological evaluation of the quality and safety of drugs in the dosage form "solution for injections." This eliminates the local irritation and necrotizing activity of drugs and minimizes the development of local pain syndrome, aseptic inflammation, necrosis, and abscess.

Effectiveness of Topical Ketorolac in Post-hemorrhoidectomy Pain Management: A Clinical Trial

Background

Postoperative pain management is one of the major challenges of surgeons and anesthesiologists.

Objectives

This study aimed to determine the efficacy of topical ketorolac in post-hemorrhoidectomy pain management.

Methods

This clinical trial was conducted on 84 candidates for hemorrhoidectomy (grade-II hemorrhoids) who visited Ali ibn Abi-Talib hospital of Rafsanjan, Kerman, Iran (2020 - 2021). The participants were selected through convenience sampling and randomly assigned to three groups of 28. The subjects were treated in topical (4 mL 0.5% Marcaine + 1 mL ketorolac at the surgical site), intramuscular (4 mL 0.5% Marcaine at the surgical site + 1 mL ketorolac intramuscularly), and control (4 mL 0.5% Marcaine at the surgical site) groups. Pain intensity was measured using the Numerical Pain Rating Scale 1, 6, 12, and 24 hours after surgery. The obtained data were analyzed using two-way repeated measures analysis of variance.

Results

Female and male patients constituted 46.4% and 53.6% of the participants, respectively. The mean pain intensity was significantly lower in the topical group than in intramuscular and control treatments in all four stages of pain assessment (P < 0.001). Some participants were treated with pethidine due to high pain intensity. However, the mean pain intensity gradually reduced over time in all three groups.

Conclusions

Study findings suggested that the topical administration of ketorolac and Marcaine was more effective than Marcaine used alone for relieving pain in patients undergoing hemorrhoidectomy.

Risk factors for unplanned admission following surgical repair of apical prolapse

Introduction and hypothesis

Same-day discharge (SDD) is increasing in popularity following surgical repair of pelvic organ prolapse. The aim of this study was to evaluate factors associated with unplanned admission (UA) in women undergoing apical prolapse repair.

Methods

This retrospective, observational cohort study included patients who underwent apical prolapse repair and planned same-day discharge (SDD) between March 2019 and December 2021. The cohort was divided into two groups: patients who were discharged on the same day as surgery (SDD group) and patients who had an unplanned admission (UA group). Demographic, pre-, intra-, and post-operative data were collected. Risk factors associated with unplanned admission were evaluated using univariate and multivariate analyses.

Results

One-hundred and eighty-four cases of apical prolapse repair met the criteria for inclusion in the final analysis; this included 142 in the SDD group and 42 in the UA group. Patients in the UA group had significantly increased estimated blood loss, longer total operative time, later time arriving to the Post-Anesthesia Care unit (PACU) and longer overall stay in the PACU. No differences were observed in the 30-day complication rate, or 30-day unanticipated healthcare encounters, between groups. Multivariate analysis revealed that receiving ketorolac post-operatively was associated with a higher likelihood of SDD (OR=2.6, 95% CI 1.032–6.580, p=0.043).

Conclusions

Among women undergoing apical prolapse repair, same-day discharge was associated with comparable immediate and 30-day complication rates. Within our cohort, post-operative treatment with ketorolac was associated with greater likelihood of SDD.

Postoperative administration of ketorolac compared to other drugs for pain control after third molar surgery: A meta-analysis of double-blind, randomized, clinical trials

AIMS

The aim of this study was to evaluate the analgesic effectiveness and adverse reactions of ketorolac in comparison with other drugs when administered postoperatively after third molar surgery.

METHODS

PubMed and Google Scholar were utilized to search for articles comparing the efficacy and safety of ketorolac and other analgesic agents after third molar surgery. Data from papers with a lower risk of bias were recorded. The overall evaluation of analgesia onset, general and subgroup evaluation of the number of patients requiring rescue analgesic medication, general and subgroup assessment of the study medication (satisfaction on the study drugs), and the overall estimation of adverse effects were performed using the Review Manager Software 5.3 to analyse the data and obtain the meta-analysis plot.

RESULTS

The subgroup evaluation of the study medication showed that patients who received ketorolac 30 mg were more satisfied than those who were given parecoxib 1 mg (odds ratio [OR] = 8.57, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.66-20.08, P = .00001), parecoxib 2 mg (OR = 7.17, 95% CI = 2.88-17.86, P = .0001), parecoxib 5 mg (OR = 3.03, 95% CI = 1.69-5.41, P = .0002), and parecoxib 10 mg (OR = 2.42, 95% CI = 1.36-4.32, P = .003). Moreover, patients who received ketorolac reported fewer adverse reactions compared with those who had received opioid analgesics (OR = 0.14, 95% CI = 0.32-1.76, P = .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The data from this study demonstrates that the postoperative administration of ketorolac 30 mg presents better results on patient satisfaction when compared to parecoxib 1 mg to 10 mg, and presents a similar satisfaction to parecoxib 20 mg following third molar removal.

Single-dose intravenous ibuprofen for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Postoperative administration of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) reduces patient opioid requirements and, in turn, may reduce the incidence and severity of opioid-induced adverse events (AEs).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of single-dose intravenous (IV) ibuprofen, compared with placebo or an active comparator, for moderate-to-severe postoperative pain in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases without language restrictions: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and LILACS on 10 June 2021. We checked clinical trials registers and reference lists of retrieved articles for additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized trials that compared a single postoperative dose of intravenous (IV) ibuprofen with placebo or another active treatment, for treating acute postoperative pain in adults following any surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors independently considered trials for review inclusion, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. Our primary outcome was the number of participants in each arm achieving at least 50% pain relief over a 4- and 6-hour period. Our secondary outcomes were time to, and number of participants using rescue medication; withdrawals due to lack of efficacy, adverse events (AEs), and for any other cause; and number of participants reporting or experiencing any AE, serious AEs (SAEs), and specific NSAID-related or opioid-related AEs. We were not able to carry out any planned meta-analysis. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

Only one study met our inclusion criteria, involving 201 total participants, mostly female (mean age 42 years), undergoing primary, unilateral, distal, first metatarsal bunionectomy (with osteotomy and internal fixation). Ibuprofen 300 mg, placebo or acetaminophen 1000 mg was administered intravenously to participants reporting moderate pain intensity the day after surgery. Since we identified only one study for inclusion, we did not perform any quantitative analyses. The study was at low risk of bias for most domains. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence due to serious study limitations, indirectness and imprecision. Ibuprofen versus placebo Findings of the single study found that at both the 4-hour and 6-hour assessment period, the proportion of participants with at least 50% pain relief was 32% (24/76) for those assigned to ibuprofen and 22% (11/50) for those assigned to placebo. These findings produced a risk ratio (RR) of 1.44 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 2.66 versus placebo for at least 50% of maximum pain relief over the 4-hour and 6-hour period (very low-certainty evidence). Median time to rescue medication was 101 minutes for ibuprofen and 71 minutes for placebo (1 study, 126 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The number of participants using rescue medication was not reported within the included study. During the study (1 study, 126 participants), 58/76 (76%) of participants assigned to ibuprofen and 39/50 (78%) assigned to placebo reported or experienced any adverse event (AE), (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.19; low-certainty evidence). No serious AEs (SAEs) were experienced (1 study, 126 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen versus active comparators Ibuprofen (300 mg) was similar to the active comparator, IV acetaminophen (1000 mg) at 4 hours and 6 hours (1 study, 126 participants). For those assigned to active control (acetaminophen), the proportion of participants with at least 50% pain relief was 35% (26/75) at 4 hours and 31% (23/75) at 6 hours. At 4 hours, these findings produced a RR of 0.91 (95% CI 0.58 to 1.43; very low-certainty evidence) versus active comparator (acetaminophen). At 6 hours, these findings produced a RR of 1.03 (95% CI 0.64 to 1.66; very low-certainty evidence) versus active comparator (acetaminophen). Median time to rescue medication was 101 minutes for ibuprofen and 125 minutes for the active comparator, acetaminophen (1 study, 151 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The number of participants using rescue medication was not reported within the included study. During the study, 8/76 (76%) of participants assigned to ibuprofen and 45/75 (60%) assigned to active control (acetaminophen) reported or experienced any AE, (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.59; very low-certainty evidence). No SAEs were experienced (1 study, 151 participants; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to support or refute the suggestion that IV ibuprofen is effective and safe for acute postoperative pain in adults.

Single-dose intravenous ketorolac for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pain is common and may be severe. Postoperative administration of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) reduces patient opioid requirements and, in turn, may reduce the incidence and severity of opioid-induced adverse events (AEs).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of single-dose intravenous ketorolac, compared with placebo or an active comparator, for moderate to severe postoperative pain in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases without language restrictions: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and LILACS on 20 April 2020. We checked clinical trials registers and reference lists of retrieved articles for additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized double-blind trials that compared a single postoperative dose of intravenous ketorolac with placebo or another active treatment, for treating acute postoperative pain in adults following any surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.  Our primary outcome was the number of participants in each arm achieving at least 50% pain relief over a four- and six-hour period. Our secondary outcomes were time to and number of participants using rescue medication; withdrawals due to lack of efficacy, adverse events (AEs), and for any other cause; and number of participants experiencing any AE, serious AEs (SAEs), and NSAID-related or opioid-related AEs. For subgroup analysis, we planned to analyze different doses of parenteral ketorolac separately and to analyze results based on the type of surgery performed. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 12 studies, involving 1905 participants undergoing various surgeries (pelvic/abdominal, dental, and orthopedic), with 17 to 83 participants receiving intravenous ketorolac in each study. Mean study population ages ranged from 22.5 years to 67.4 years. Most studies administered a dose of ketorolac of 30 mg; one study assessed 15 mg, and another administered 60 mg. Most studies had an unclear risk of bias for some domains, particularly allocation concealment and blinding, and a high risk of bias due to small sample size. The overall certainty of evidence for each outcome ranged from very low to moderate. Reasons for downgrading certainty included serious study limitations, inconsistency and imprecision. Ketorolac versus placebo Very low-certainty evidence from eight studies (658 participants) suggests that ketorolac results in a large increase in the number of participants achieving at least 50% pain relief over four hours compared to placebo, but the evidence is very uncertain (risk ratio (RR) 2.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.80 to 4.37). The number needed to treat for one additional participant to benefit (NNTB) was 2.4 (95% CI 1.8 to 3.7). Low-certainty evidence from 10 studies (914 participants) demonstrates that ketorolac may result in a large increase in the number of participants achieving at least 50% pain relief over six hours compared to placebo (RR 3.26, 95% CI 1.93 to 5.51). The NNTB was 2.5 (95% CI 1.9 to 3.7). Among secondary outcomes, for time to rescue medication, moderate-certainty evidence comparing intravenous ketorolac versus placebo demonstrated a mean median of 271 minutes for ketorolac versus 104 minutes for placebo (6 studies, 633 participants). For the number of participants using rescue medication, very low-certainty evidence from five studies (417 participants) compared ketorolac with placebo. The RR was 0.60 (95% CI 0.36 to 1.00), that is, it did not demonstrate a difference between groups. Ketorolac probably results in a slight increase in total adverse event rates compared with placebo (74% versus 65%; 8 studies, 810 participants; RR 1.09, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.19; number needed to treat for an additional harmful event (NNTH) 16.7, 95% CI 8.3 to infinite, moderate-certainty evidence). Serious AEs were rare. Low-certainty evidence from eight studies (703 participants) did not demonstrate a difference in rates between ketorolac and placebo (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.13 to 3.03). Ketorolac versus NSAIDs  Ketorolac was compared to parecoxib in four studies and diclofenac in two studies. For our primary outcome, over both four and six hours there was no evidence of a difference between intravenous ketorolac and another NSAID (low-certainty and moderate-certainty evidence, respectively). Over four hours, four studies (337 participants) produced an RR of 1.04 (95% CI 0.89 to 1.21) and over six hours, six studies (603 participants) produced an RR of 1.06 (95% CI 0.95 to 1.19). For time to rescue medication, low-certainty evidence from four studies (427 participants) suggested that participants receiving ketorolac waited an extra 35 minutes (mean median 331 minutes versus 296 minutes). For the number of participants using rescue medication, very low-certainty evidence from three studies (260 participants) compared ketorolac with another NSAID. The RR was 0.90 (95% CI 0.58 to 1.40), that is, there may be little or no difference between groups.   Ketorolac probably results in a slight increase in total adverse event rates compared with another NSAID (76% versus 68%, 5 studies, 516 participants; RR 1.11, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.23; NNTH 12.5, 95% CI 6.7 to infinite, moderate-certainty evidence). Serious AEs were rare. Low-certainty evidence from five studies (530 participants) did not demonstrate a difference in rates between ketorolac and another NSAID (RR 3.18, 95% CI 0.13 to 76.99). Only one of the five studies reported a single serious AE.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The amount and certainty of evidence for the use of intravenous ketorolac as a treatment for postoperative pain varies across efficacy and safety outcomes and amongst comparators, from very low to moderate. The available evidence indicates that postoperative intravenous ketorolac administration may offer substantial pain relief for most patients, but further research may impact this estimate. Adverse events appear to occur at a slightly higher rate in comparison to placebo and to other NSAIDs. Insufficient information is available to assess whether intravenous ketorolac has a different rate of gastrointestinal or surgical-site bleeding, renal dysfunction, or cardiovascular events versus other NSAIDs. There was a lack of studies in cardiovascular surgeries and in elderly populations who may be at increased risk for adverse events.