Assessment of Clinical Efficacy of Intranasal Desmopressin Spray and Diclofenac Sodium Suppository in Treatment of Renal Colic Versus Diclofenac Sodium Alone

Potential clinical applications of current and future oral forms of desmopressin (Review)

Desmopressin is a synthetic analogue of vasopressin and a selective vasopressin receptor 2 agonist. It was first synthesised in 1967 and utilised for its antidiuretic properties. It is also used in bleeding disorders to enhance clotting. Other potential uses of the drug have been reported. The present review aims to provide a broad overview of the literature on potential further uses of oral forms of desmopressin. Key therapeutic areas of interest were identified based on known physiological activities/targets of desmopressin or reports of an effect of desmopressin in the literature. The feasibility of adequate dosing with oral forms of the drug was also considered. Systematic literature searches were carried out using the silvi.ai software for the identified areas, and summaries of available papers were included in tables and discussed. The results of the searches showed that desmopressin has been investigated for its efficacy in a number of areas, including bleeding control, renal colic, the central nervous system and oncology. Evidence suggests that oral desmopressin may have the potential to be of clinical benefit for renal colic and bleeding control in particular. However, further research is needed to clarify its effect in these areas, including randomised controlled studies and studies specifically of oral formulations (and doses). Further research may also yield findings for cancer, cognition and overactive bladder.

Three birds with one stone: co-encapsulation of diclofenac and DL-menthol for realizing enhanced energy deposition, glycolysis inhibition and anti-inflammation in HIFU surgery

Despite attracting increasing attention in clinic, non-invasive high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) surgery still commonly suffers from tumor recurrence and even matastasis due to the generation of thermo-resistance in non-apoptotic tumor cells and adverse therapy-induced inflammation with enhanced secretion of growth factors in irradiated region. In this work, inspired by the intrinsic property that the expression of thermo-resistant heat shock proteins (HSPs) is highly dependent with adenosine triphosphate (ATP), dual-functionalized diclofenac (DC) with anti-inflammation and glycolysis-inhibition abilities was successfully co-encapsulated with phase-change dl-menthol (DLM) in poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) nanoparticles (DC/DLM@PLGA NPs) to realize improved HIFU surgery without causing adverse inflammation. Both in vitro and in vivo studies demonstrated the great potential of DC/DLM@PLGA NPs for serving as an efficient synergistic agent for HIFU surgery, which can not only amplify HIFU ablation efficacy through DLM vaporization-induced energy deposition but also simultaneously sensitize tumor cells to hyperthermia by glycolysis inhibition as well as diminished inflammation. Thus, our study provides an efficient strategy for simultaneously improving the curative efficiency and diminishing the harmful inflammatory responses of clinical HIFU surgery.

Intravenous Paracetamol vs Intranasal Desmopressin for Renal Colic in the Emergency Department: A Randomized Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the analgesic efficacy of intranasal desmopressin alone vs intravenous paracetamol in patients referred to the emergency department with renal colic.

DESIGN

Randomized clinical trial.

SETTING

This study was conducted in the emergency unit of a university hospital.

SUBJECTS

Patients referred to the emergency room with renal colic.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

Effect of intranasal desmopressin in pain relief in comparison with intravenous paracetamol.

METHODS

In this trial, 240 patients diagnosed with renal colic were randomly divided into two groups to compare the analgesic effect of intravenous paracetamol (15 mg/kg) and intranasal desmopressin spray (40 μg). Pain scores were measured by a numeric rating scale at baseline and after 15, 30, and 60 minutes. Adverse effects and need for rescue analgesic (0.05 mg/kg max 3 mg morphine sulphate) were also recorded at the end of the study.

RESULTS

Three hundred patients were eligible for the study; however, 240 were included in the final analysis. The patients in the two groups were similar in their baseline characteristics and baseline pain scores. The mean pain score after 15 minutes was more reduced and was clinically significant (>3) in the desmopressin group (P < 0.0001). There was no significant difference between mean pain scores in the two groups after 30 minutes (P = 0.350) or 60 minutes (P = 0.269), but the efficacy of the two drugs was significant in terms of pain reduction (>6).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed that intranasal desmopressin is as effective as intravenous paracetamol for renal colic pain management; however, significant clinical reduction in pain score occurred faster with intranasal desmopressin.

The analgesic action of desmopressin in renal colic

Urolithiasis is a frequent problem causing a significant clinical, psychological and socio-economic burden. Analgesia remains the most important element in the medical treatment of renal colic. Nonetheless, both NSAIDs and opiates have a side effect profile which can cause further complications. As such, the use of desmopressin for renal colic has received increased attention in the last two decades. This paper provides an overview of current evidence on the use of desmopressin as an analgesic strategy in renal colic.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Sublingual desmopressin is efficient and safe in the therapy of lithiasic renal colic

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effects of newer sublingual desmopressin administration in lithiasic renal colic, alone or combined with a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID).

METHODS

Prospective single-blind study including an initial number of 249 patients with lithiasic renal colic was randomized as follows: group NSAID (71 patients) received ketorolac tromethamine (ketorolac) 30 mg im and sublingual placebo (vitamin C), groups D1 and D2 (57 and 62 patients) received sublingual desmopressin (Minirin Melt), 60 and 120 μg, respectively, whereas group C (59 patients) received a combination of 30 mg im ketorolac and 60 μg sublingual desmopressin. Pain intensity was assessed using the visual analogue scale before and thirty minutes after drug administration. Patients experiencing pain aggravation were rescued and excluded from the study.

RESULTS

Dropout incidence was higher in the NSAID group than in the groups treated with desmopressin in monotherapy or combined with ketorolac (p < 0.05). Pain intensity was diminished at least as potently by the monotherapy with desmopressin and ketorolac. The higher dose of desmopressin and the combination therapy decreased pain intensity with 56 and 59%, respectively, significantly more than the 47% decrease obtained with ketorolac alone (p < 0.05 and p < 0.001). Mean pain decrease was higher in the combination group (C) than in the NSAID or D1 groups (p < 0.001 and p < 0.05, respectively), suggesting drug additivity. Patients did not experience severe side effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Sublingual desmopressin is at least as potent as NSAID in the treatment of lithiasic renal colic. The combination of sublingual desmopressin and NSAID has additive analgesic effects.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and non-opioids for acute renal colic

BACKGROUND

Renal colic is acute pain caused by urinary stones. The prevalence of urinary stones is between 10% and 15% in the United States, making renal colic one of the common reasons for urgent urological care. The pain is usually severe and the first step in the management is adequate analgesia. Many different classes of medications have been used in this regard including non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and narcotics.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review was to assess benefits and harms of different NSAIDs and non-opioids in the treatment of adult patients with acute renal colic and if possible to determine which medication (or class of medications) are more appropriate for this purpose. Clinically relevant outcomes such as efficacy of pain relief, time to pain relief, recurrence of pain, need for rescue medication and side effects were explored.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register (to 27 November 2014) through contact with the Trials' Search Co-ordinator using search terms relevant to this review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only randomised or quasi randomised studies were included. Other inclusion criteria included adult patients with a clinical diagnosis of renal colic due to urolithiasis, at least one treatment arm included a non-narcotic analgesic compared to placebo or another non-narcotic drug, and reporting of pain outcome or medication adverse effect. Patient-rated pain by a validated tool, time to relief, need for rescue medication and pain recurrence constituted the outcomes of interest. Any adverse effects (minor or major) reported in the studies were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Abstracts were reviewed by at least two authors independently. Papers meeting the inclusion criteria were fully reviewed and relevant data were recorded in a standardized Cochrane Renal Group data collection form. For dichotomous outcomes relative risks and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. For continuous outcomes the weighted mean difference was estimated. Both fixed and random models were used for meta-analysis. We assessed the analgesic effects using four different outcome variables: patient-reported pain relief using a visual analogue scale (VAS); proportion of patients with at least 50% reduction in pain; need for rescue medication; and pain recurrence. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² test.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 50 studies (5734 participants) were included in this review and 37 studies (4483 participants) contributed to our meta-analyses. Selection bias was low in 34% of the studies or unclear in 66%; performance bias was low in 74%, high in 14% and unclear in 12%; attrition bias was low in 82% and high in 18%; selective reporting bias low in 92% of the studies; and other biases (industry funding) was high in 4%, unclear in 18% and low in 78%.Patient-reported pain (VAS) results varied widely with high heterogeneity observed. For those comparisons which could be pooled we observed the following: NSAIDs significantly reduced pain compared to antispasmodics (5 studies, 303 participants: MD -12.97, 95% CI -21.80 to - 4.14; I² = 74%) and combination therapy of NSAIDs plus antispasmodics was significantly more effective in pain control than NSAID alone (2 studies, 310 participants: MD -1.99, 95% CI -2.58 to -1.40; I² = 0%).NSAIDs were significantly more effective than placebo in reducing pain by 50% within the first hour (3 studies, 197 participants: RR 2.28, 95% CI 1.47 to 3.51; I² = 15%). Indomethacin was found to be less effective than other NSAIDs (4 studies, 412 participants: RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.60; I² = 55%). NSAIDs were significantly more effective than hyoscine in pain reduction (5 comparisons, 196 participants: RR 2.44, 95% CI 1.61 to 3.70; I² = 28%). The combination of NSAIDs and antispasmodics was not superior to NSAIDs only (9 comparisons, 906 participants: RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.13; I² = 59%). The results were mixed when NSAIDs were compared to other non-opioid medications.When the need for rescue medication was evaluated, Patients receiving NSAIDs were significantly less likely to require rescue medicine than those receiving placebo (4 comparisons, 180 participants: RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.60; I² = 24%) and NSAIDs were more effective than antispasmodics (4 studies, 299 participants: RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.84; I² = 65%). Combination of NSAIDs and antispasmodics was not superior to NSAIDs (7 comparisons, 589 participants: RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.57; I² = 10%). Indomethacin was less effective than other NSAIDs (4 studies, 517 participants: RR 1.36, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.94; I² = 14%) except for lysine acetyl salicylate (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.65).Pain recurrence was reported by only three studies which could not be pooled: a higher proportion of patients treated with 75 mg diclofenac (IM) showed pain recurrence in the first 24 hours of follow-up compared to those treated with 40 mg piroxicam (IM) (60 participants: RR 0.05, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.81); no significant difference in pain recurrence at 72 hours was observed between piroxicam plus phloroglucinol and piroxicam plus placebo groups (253 participants: RR 2.52, 95% CI 0.15 to12.75); and there was no significant difference in pain recurrence within 72 hours of discharge between IM piroxicam and IV paracetamol (82 participants: RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.54).Side effects were presented inconsistently, but no major events were reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Although due to variability in studies (inclusion criteria, outcome variables and interventions) and the evidence is not of highest quality, we still believe that NSAIDs are an effective treatment for renal colic when compared to placebo or antispasmodics. The addition of antispasmodics to NSAIDS does not result in better pain control. Data on other types of non-opioid, non-NSAID medication was scarce.Major adverse effects are not reported in the literature for the use of NSAIDs for treatment of renal colic.

The efficacy of intranasal desmopressin as an adjuvant in the acute renal colic pain management

The aim of this study was to compare analgesic effect of intramuscular (IM) sodium diclofenac and intranasal desmopressin combination with IM sodium diclofenac alone in patients with acute renal colic. In this randomized double-blind clinical trial, all patients aged 18 to 55 years who were diagnosed as acute renal colic and met the inclusion and exclusion criteria were randomized into two groups to receive 40 μg intranasal desmopressin spray and 75 mg IM sodium diclofenac combination (Group A) or 75 mg IM sodium diclofenac alone (Group B). The pain score of patients was assessed using a visual analogue scale (VAS) at baseline, 15, 30, 45, and 60 minutes after administration. Of all 159 patients who were assessed for eligibility finally, the results of 120 patients were analyzed. There was no significant difference regarding age and gender between two groups. The baseline VAS score was not significantly different between two groups (P = 0.44). The Mean ± SD scores of two groups reduced 15 minutes after drug administration, but this decrease was significantly more in Group A compared with Group B (P = 0.02). This pattern continued in minutes 30, 45, and 60 of drug administration. Our results showed that desmopressin could be used as an effective adjuvant in acute renal colic pain management.

Urolithiasis in the emergency department

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

Vasopressin receptors in voiding dysfunction

Arginine vasopressin (AVP), also known as vasopressin or anti-diuretic hormone, is a neuropeptide produced in the hypothalamus. It is primarily responsible for osmoregulation and thus maintains body fluid homeostasis. It is also a potent vasoconstrictor, may have a role in higher cognitive functions and affects metabolism. All the biological and cellular effects of vasopressin are mediated by the interaction of this hormone with three G-protein-coupled receptors - V(1a), V(1b) and V(2).Urological applications are based on the rationale that V(2) receptors mediate water conservation and increase urine osmolality. Due to their anti-diuretic properties mediated by the V(2) receptors, synthetic vasopressin agonists, such as desmopressin, are now commonly used for the treatment of nocturnal polyuria, central diabetes insipidus and nocturnal enuresis and potentially in urinary incontinence. Desmopressin has been licenced worldwide for haematological indications of haemophilia and von Willebrand disease. Vasopressin receptor antagonists correct hyponatremia by blocking the activation of the V(2) receptor and induce a free water diuresis without an accompanying natriuresis or kaliuresis; an effect termed 'aquaresis'. Interfering with vasopressin signalling by administering vasopressin antagonists may have clinical benefits in acute and chronic heart failure.