Oral naproxen versus oral tramadol for analgesia after cesarean delivery

The comparison of ibuprofen versus acetaminophen for blood pressure in preeclampsia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies

Introduction: The comparison of ibuprofen with acetaminophen for blood pressure (BP) in preeclampsia remains controversial. We conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the impact of ibuprofen versus acetaminophen on BP for preeclampsia.Methods: We search PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, EBSCO, and Cochrane Library databases through October 2019 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of ibuprofen versus acetaminophen on BP for preeclampsia. This meta-analysis is performed using the random-effect model.Results: Four RCTs are included in the meta-analysis. Overall in preeclampsia patients, ibuprofen and acetaminophen show similar systolic BP (SBP) (standard mean difference [SMD] = 0.04; 95% CI = -0.26-0.34; p= .81), diastolic BP (DBP) (SMD = 0.15; 95% CI = -0.18-0.48; p  = 0.38), mean BP (MAP) (SMD = 0.02; 95% CI = -0.29-0.33; p = .91), severe range BP (SMD = -0.10; 95% CI = -0.40-0.19; p = .50), severe hypertension (SMD = 1.18; 95% CI = 0.85-1.62; p = .32), and satisfaction level (SMD = 1.2; 95% CI = 0.95-1.53; p = .13).Conclusions: Ibuprofen and acetaminophen may have no significant influence on BP for preeclampsia.

Nonopioid versus opioid analgesia after hospital discharge following cesarean delivery: a randomized equivalence trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether pain score after cesarean delivery is equivalent among women receiving outpatient nonopioid vs opioid analgesics.

STUDY DESIGN

In this trial 170 women with cesarean delivery were randomized to outpatient ibuprofen plus acetaminophen (nonopioid, n=85) or ibuprofen plus hydrocodone-acetaminophen (opioid, n=85). Primary outcome was pain score on a visual analog scale at 2-4 weeks postpartum, which was obtained from 149 (88%) women. Treatments were considered equivalent if the difference between the mean pain scores of each group and its 95% confidence interval were between -10 and 10 mm. A zero-inflated negative binomial model was used to estimate the difference between group means.

RESULTS

Treatments were not equivalent; mean pain score was lower (better) in the nonopioid group (12.3±19.5 vs 15.9±20.4 mm, adjusted mean difference, 4.8; 95% CI, -2.1 to 11.9 mm).

CONCLUSION

Pain score 2-4 weeks after cesarean delivery was lower in women receiving nonopioid analgesics.

Systemic adjunct analgesics for cesarean delivery: a narrative review

It is critical to adequately treat postoperative cesarean delivery pain. The use of parenteral or neuraxial opioids has been a mainstay, but opioids have side effects that can be troubling and the opioid crisis in the United States has highlighted the necessity to utilize analgesics other than opioids. Other analgesic options include neuraxial analgesics, nerve blocks such as the transversus abdominis plane block, and non-opioid parenteral and oral medications. The goal of this article is to review non-opioid systemic analgesic adjuncts following cesarean delivery, focusing on their efficacy and side effects as well as their impact on reduction of opioid requirements after surgery.

[Medications in breastfeeding: what evidence is there?]

Breastfeeding plays a fundamental role in the benefits for the health of the newborn child and the nursing mother. The use of medications during breastfeeding is a relevant issue, by virtue of the frequent need for pharmacological treatment in the postpartum period. The scope of this article was to conduct a review of the literature regarding the efficacy and safety of medications used during the breastfeeding period. A search was conducted in the PubMed (National Library of Medicine), ScienceDirect and Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde (BVS) databases for articles published in Portuguese, English and Spanish in the period from 1981 to 2016. This review discusses the risk of the use of medications during lactation and the effects that they may have on the breastfed infant. Few medications are contraindicated and others require care due the risk of adverse effects on breastfed infants or in the suppression of breast milk volume. Therefore, the dissemination of updated information for the health professional to adequately assess the risks and the benefits of the use of medications during breastfeeding is of vital importance, thereby contributing to avoid early weaning.

Effect of ibuprofen vs acetaminophen on postpartum hypertension in preeclampsia with severe features: a double-masked, randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug use has been shown to increase blood pressure in nonpregnant adults. Because of this, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists suggests avoiding their use in women with postpartum hypertension; however, evidence to support this recommendation is lacking.

OBJECTIVE

Our goal was to test the hypothesis that nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, such as ibuprofen, adversely affect postpartum blood pressure control in women with preeclampsia with severe features.

STUDY DESIGN

At delivery, we randomized women with preeclampsia with severe features to receive around-the-clock oral dosing with either 600 mg of ibuprofen or 650 mg of acetaminophen every 6 hours. Dosing began within 6 hours after delivery and continued until discharge, with opioid analgesics available as needed for breakthrough pain. Study drugs were encapsulated in identical capsules such that patients, nurses, and physicians were masked to study allocation. Exclusion criteria were serum aspartate aminotransferase or alanine aminotransferase >200 mg/dL, serum creatinine >1.0 mg/dL, infectious hepatitis, gastroesophageal reflux disease, age <18 years, or current incarceration. Our primary outcome was the duration of severe-range hypertension, defined as the time (in hours) from delivery to the last blood pressure ≥160/110 mm Hg. Secondary outcomes were time from delivery to last blood pressure ≥150/100 mm Hg, mean arterial pressure, need for antihypertensive medication at discharge, prolongation of hospital stay for blood pressure control, postpartum use of short-acting antihypertensives for acute blood pressure control, and opioid use for breakthrough pain. We analyzed all outcome data according to intention-to-treat principles.

RESULTS

We assessed 154 women for eligibility, of whom 100 met entry criteria, agreed to participate, and were randomized to receive postpartum ibuprofen or acetaminophen for first-line pain control. Seven patients crossed over or did not receive their allocated study drug, and 93 completed the study protocol in their assigned groups. We found no differences in baseline characteristics between groups, including mode of delivery, body mass index, parity, race, chronic hypertension, and maximum blood pressure prior to delivery. We did not find a difference in the duration of severe-range hypertension in the ibuprofen vs acetaminophen groups (35.3 vs 38.0 hours, P = .30). There were no differences between groups in the secondary outcome measures of time from delivery to last blood pressure ≥150/100 mm Hg, postpartum mean arterial pressure, maximum postpartum systolic or diastolic blood pressures, any postpartum blood pressure ≥160/110 mm Hg, short-acting antihypertensive use for acute blood pressure control, length of postpartum stay, need to extend postpartum stay for blood pressure control, antihypertensive use at discharge, or opioid use for inadequate pain control. In a subgroup analysis of patients who experienced severe-range hypertension, the mean time to blood pressure control in the acetaminophen group was 68.4 hours and ibuprofen group was 56.7 hours (P = .26). At 6 weeks postpartum, there were no differences between groups in the rates of obstetric triage visits, hospital readmissions, continued opioid use, or continued antihypertensive use.

CONCLUSION

The first-line use of ibuprofen rather than acetaminophen for postpartum pain did not lengthen the duration of severe-range hypertension in women with preeclampsia with severe features.

Fixed time interval compared with on-demand oral analgesia protocols for post-caesarean pain: a randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy, safety and satisfaction from two modes of oral analgesia administration for the treatment of post-caesarean pain in the first 48 h following surgery: on-demand versus fixed time interval administration.

DESIGN

Open label parallel-group, randomised-controlled trial from February to December 2013.

SETTING

University-affiliated hospital in Israel.

POPULATION

Two-hundred women who underwent caesarean delivery with regional anaesthesia.

METHODS

Patients were randomly assigned to receive predetermined combinations of tramadol, paracetamol and diclofenac either following patient demand or at predetermined 6-h intervals for the first 48 h. If the patient requested additional analgesia, Percocet (oxycodone and paracetamol) was given as a rescue treatment.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Pain intensity and satisfaction were self-evaluated with visual analogue scale of 0 (no pain/least satisfaction) to 10 (worst pain/highest satisfaction). Breastfeeding, need for supplemental formula, and maternal and neonatal adverse effects were also evaluated.

RESULTS

The 'fixed time interval' group, compared with the 'on-demand' group, had lower mean pain score (2.8 ± 0.84 versus 4.1 ± 0.48, respectively; P < 0.0001), higher satisfaction rate (9.1 ± 1.2 versus 8.3 ± 1.5, respectively; P < 0.0001), more breastfeeds (23.7 ± 6.5 versus 19.2 ± 6.2, respectively; P < 0.0001) and less use of supplemental formulas (8.2 ± 5.2 versus 11.9 ± 6.5, respectively; P < 0.0001). The number of times that drugs were given was slightly higher in the 'fixed time interval' group without an increase in maternal adverse effects, which were mild. No adverse effects were reported for the neonates.

CONCLUSION

Administration of oral analgesia in fixed time intervals is superior to drug administration following patient demand without increasing maternal or neonatal adverse outcomes.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

Oral analgesia in fixed time intervals is superior to analgesia following demand.

[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.

Oral analgesia for relieving post-caesarean pain

BACKGROUND

Oral analgesia is a convenient and widely used form of pain relief following caesarean section. It includes various medications used at different doses alone or in adjunction to other form of analgesia.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of oral analgesia for post-caesarean pain relief.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 July 2014) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Cluster-randomised trials were eligible for inclusion but none were identified. Quasi-randomised and cross-over trials were not eligible for inclusion.Interventions included oral medication given to women for post-caesarean pain relief compared with oral medication, or placebo/no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed for inclusion all the potential studies and independently assessed trial quality, extracted the data using the agreed data extraction form, and checked them for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

Eight small trials involving 962 women (out of 13 included trials) contributed data to the analysis, of which only four trials had low risk of bias.None of the included studies reported on 'adequate pain relief', which is one of this review's primary outcomes. 1. Opiod analgesics versus placeboBased on one trial involving 120 women, the effect of opioids versus placebo was not significant in relation to the need for additional pain relief (primary outcome) (risk ratio (RR) 0.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 1.92), and the effect in terms of adverse drug effects outcomes was also uncertain (RR 6.58, 95% CI 0.38 to 113.96).Low (75 mg) and high (150 mg) doses of tramadol had a similar effect on the need for additional pain relief (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.12 to 3.78 and RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.68, respectively, one study, 80 women). 2. Non-opioid analgesia versus placeboThe confidence interval for the lower requirement for additional analgesia (primary outcome) with the non-opioid analgesia group was wide and includes little or no effect (average RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.01, six studies, 584 women). However, we observed substantial heterogeneity due to the variety of non-opioid drugs used (I(2) = 85%). In a subgroup analysis of different drugs, only gabapentin use resulted in less need for additional pain relief (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.51, one trial, 126 women). There was no difference in need for additional pain relief with the use of celexocib, ibuprofen, ketoprofen, naproxen, paracetamol. Maternal drug effects were more common with the use of non-opioid analgesics (RR 11.12, 95% CI 2.13 to 58.22, two trials, 267 women).Gabapentin 300 mg (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.49, one study, 63 women) and 600 mg (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.71, one study, 63 women) as well as ketoprofen 100 mg (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.79, one study 72 women) were both more effective than placebo with respect to the need for additional pain relief. However, the 50 mg ketoprofen group and the placebo group did not differ in terms of the number of women requiring additional pain relief (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.07, one study, 72 women). 3. Combination analgesics versus placeboOur pooled analysis for the effect of combination analgesics on the need for additional pain relief was RR 0.70 (95% CI 0.35 to 1.40, three trials, 242 women, I(2) = 69%). When comparing different drugs within the combination oral analgesics versus placebo comparison we observed subgroup differences (P = 0.05; I² = 65.8%). One trial comparing paracetamol plus codeine versus placebo resulted in fewer women requiring additional pain relief (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.82, one trial, 65 women). However, there were no differences in the the number of women requiring additional pain relief when comparing paracetamol plus oxycodone versus placebo, or paracetamol plus propoxyphene (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.28, one trial, 96 women and RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.11 to 3.69, one trial, 81 women, respectively).Maternal drug effects were more common in combination analgesics group versus placebo (RR 13.18, 95% CI 2.86 to 60.68, three trials, 252 women). 4. Opioid analgesics versus non-opioid analgesicsThe confidence interval for the effect on additional pain relief between opioid and non-opioid drugs was very wide (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.07 to 3.51, one trial, 121 women). Side effects were more common with the use opioids versus non-opioids analgesics (RR 2.32, 95% CI 1.15 to 4.69, two trials 241 women). 5. Opioid analgesics versus combination analgesicsThere was no difference in need for additional pain relief in opioid analgesics versus combination analgesics based on one study involving 121 women comparing tramadol and paracetamol plus propoxyphene (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.07 to 3.51). Maternal adverse effects also did not differ between the two groups (RR 6.74, 95% CI 0.39 to 116.79). 6. Non-opioid versus combination analgesicsThe need for additional pain relief was greater in the group of women who received non-opoid analgesics (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.93, one trial, 192 women) compared with the group of women who received combination analgesics. Secondary outcomes not reported in the included studiesNo data were found on the following secondary outcomes: number of days in hospital post-operatively, re-hospitalisation due to incisional pain, fully breastfeeding on discharge, mixed feeding at discharge, incisional pain at six weeks after caesarean section, maternal post partum depression, effect (negative) on mother and baby interaction and cost of treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Eight trials with 962 women were included in the analysis, but only four trials were of high quality. All the trials were small. We carried out subgroup analysis for different drugs within the same group and for high versus low doses of the same drug. However, the relatively few studies (one to two trials) and numbers of women (40 to 136) limits the reliability of these subgroup analyses.Due to limited data available no conclusions can be made regarding the safest and the most effective form of oral analgesia for post-caesarean pain. Further studies are necessary.

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.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs during pregnancy and the initiation of lactation

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and aspirin, which are available as "over-the counter" medications in most countries, are widely used by both pregnant and lactating women. They are popular non-opioid analgesics for the treatment of pain after vaginal and operative delivery. In addition, NSAIDs are used for tocolysis in premature labor, and low-dose aspirin has a role in the prevention of preeclampsia and recurrent miscarriage in antiphospholipid syndrome. NSAIDs and aspirin may affect fertility and increase the risk of early pregnancy loss. In the second trimester their use is considered reasonably safe, but has been associated with fetal cryptorchism. In the third trimester, NSAIDs and aspirin are usually avoided because of significant fetal risks such as renal injury, oligohydramnios, constriction of the ductus arteriosus (with potential for persistent pulmonary hypertension in the newborn), necrotizing enterocolitis, and intracranial hemorrhage. Maternal administration or ingestion of most NSAIDs results in low infant exposure via breastmilk, such that both cyclooxygenase-1 and cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors are generally considered safe, and preferable to aspirin, when breastfeeding.

Comparison of the analgesic effects of oral tramadol and naproxen sodium on pain relief during IUD insertion

OBJECTIVE

To compare the analgesic efficacy of oral tramadol and naproxen sodium on pain during insertion of an intrauterine device (IUD).

DESIGN

Randomized, double-blinded, clinical trial (Canadian Task Force classification I).

SETTING

University-affiliated hospital. Single-center.

PATIENTS

One hundred three patients scheduled for insertion of an IUD.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomly assigned to receive oral tramadol 50 mg capsules (n = 35) or naproxen sodium 550 mg tablets (n = 34) or placebo (n = 34) 1 hour before insertion of the IUD. After insertion of the IUD, pain intensity was evaluated using a visual analog scale (VAS, 0-10). Adverse effects, patient satisfaction with the medication, and preference for using it during future insertions were also recorded.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The VAS scores were significantly different during IUD insertion among the 3 groups (p = .001). Pain scores in the tramadol group were significantly lower than in the naproxen group (p = .003), and the scores in the naproxen group was significantly lower than in the control group (p = .001). Patient satisfaction with the medication and preference for its future use were significantly lower in the control group than in the other 2 groups (p = .001).

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic analgesia using 50 mg tramadol and 550 mg naproxen, delivered orally, can be used to relieve pain during IUD insertion. However, tramadol capsules were found to be more effective than naproxen tablets.

Tramadol in pregnancy and lactation

Tramadol produces analgesic effects through both non-opioid and weak opioid activity and is commonly used to treat mild to moderate pain. It has been in use for over 30 years and has a well-established safety profile in the general population. Since tramadol is not licensed for use in pregnancy and lactation, there is limited clinical research on its use in this patient population. A systematic review was undertaken of articles published in English before June 2011, searching Pubmed, Medline, CINAHL, Embase and Cochrane databases using the terms 'tramadol and pregnancy', 'tramadol and breastfeeding', 'tramadol and lactation', and 'tramadol and neonate'.