Indomethacin suppositories versus intravenously titrated morphine for the treatment of ureteral colic

CDC Clinical Practice Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Pain - United States, 2022

This guideline provides recommendations for clinicians providing pain care, including those prescribing opioids, for outpatients aged ≥18 years. It updates the CDC Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain - United States, 2016 (MMWR Recomm Rep 2016;65[No. RR-1]:1-49) and includes recommendations for managing acute (duration of <1 month), subacute (duration of 1-3 months), and chronic (duration of >3 months) pain. The recommendations do not apply to pain related to sickle cell disease or cancer or to patients receiving palliative or end-of-life care. The guideline addresses the following four areas: 1) determining whether or not to initiate opioids for pain, 2) selecting opioids and determining opioid dosages, 3) deciding duration of initial opioid prescription and conducting follow-up, and 4) assessing risk and addressing potential harms of opioid use. CDC developed the guideline using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Recommendations are based on systematic reviews of the scientific evidence and reflect considerations of benefits and harms, patient and clinician values and preferences, and resource allocation. CDC obtained input from the Board of Scientific Counselors of the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (a federally chartered advisory committee), the public, and peer reviewers. CDC recommends that persons with pain receive appropriate pain treatment, with careful consideration of the benefits and risks of all treatment options in the context of the patient's circumstances. Recommendations should not be applied as inflexible standards of care across patient populations. This clinical practice guideline is intended to improve communication between clinicians and patients about the benefits and risks of pain treatments, including opioid therapy; improve the effectiveness and safety of pain treatment; mitigate pain; improve function and quality of life for patients with pain; and reduce risks associated with opioid pain therapy, including opioid use disorder, overdose, and death.

Increasing Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs and Reducing Opioids or Paracetamol in the Management of Acute Renal Colic: Based on Three-Stage Study Design of Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background: Currently, although non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were recommended for acute renal colic in the 2018 European Association of Urology guidelines, there are no specific NSAIDs and no specific routes of administration in this guideline. The clinical practice of advocating intravenous opioids as the initial analgesia is still common out of the fear of adverse events from NSAIDs.

Objectives: To comprehensively assess the efficacy and safety of NSAIDs, opioids, paracetamol, and combination therapy for acute renal colic.

Methods: Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMbase, the Cochrane Library, Clinical Trials Registry Platform for Clinicaltrials.gov, and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched through February 2, 2018. Two reviewers selected all randomized controlled trails (RCTs) regarding NSAIDs, opioids, paracetamol, combination therapy, and placebo were identified for analysis. We designed a three-stage strategy based on classification and pharmacological mechanisms in the first stage, routes of administration in the second stage, and specific drug branches with different routes in the third stage using network meta-analysis. The pain variance at 30 min was seen as the primary outcome.

Results: 65 RCTs with 8633 participants were involved. Comparing different classification and pharmacological mechanisms, combination therapy with more adverse events was more efficient than NSAIDs for the primary outcomes. Opioids gave rise to more nonspecific adverse events and vomiting events. NSAIDs were superior to opioids, paracetamol, and combination therapy after a full consideration of all outcomes. Comparing different routes of administration, NSAIDs with IV or IM route ranked first from efficacy and safety perspective. Comparing different specific drug branches with different routes, ibuprofen via IV route, ketorolac via IV route and diclofenac via IM route were superior for the management of acute renal colic. The results from diclofenac using IM route were more than those from ibuprofen used with IV route and ketorolac with IV route.

Conclusions: In patients with adequate renal function, diclofenac via the IM route is recommended for patients without risks of cardiovascular events. Ibuprofen and ketorolac with IV route potentially superior to diclofenac via IM route remain to be investigated. Combination therapy is an alternative choice for uncontrolled pain after the use of NSAIDs.

The use of Injectable Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs in Local Accident & Emergency Practice

Objective

To review the utilization of injectable NSAID in local A&E practice.

Materials and Methods

NSAID utilization data, in relation to type and specialty, were retrieved through the hospital and central pharmacy computer systems of the Hospital Authority.

Results

A&E departments were the main users of injectable NSAID. Their expenditure exceeded other forms of NSAID and narcotic analgesics.

Conclusion

It seems that the use of injectable NSAID in local A&E practice may be excessive. The oral route should be the first consideration, as fast acting oral preparations are now available. As there are risks of severe local complications, stringent justifications should be confirmed before intramuscular administration.

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Comparing the Efficacy of Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs, Opioids, and Paracetamol in the Treatment of Acute Renal Colic

CONTEXT

Renal colic is a common, acute presentation of urolithiasis that requires immediate pain relief. European Association of Urology guidelines recommend nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) as the preferred analgesia. However, the fear of NSAID adverse effects and the uncertainty about superior analgesic effect have maintained the practice of advocating intravenous opioids as the initial analgesia.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the safety and efficacy of NSAIDs with opioids and paracetamol (acetaminophen) for the management of acute renal colic.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Google Scholar, and the reference list of retrieved articles were searched up to December 2016 without language restrictions. Two reviewers independently assessed eligible studies using the Cochrane Collaboration tool for assessing and reporting the risk of bias and abstracted data using predefined data fields.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

From 468 potentially relevant studies, 36 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including 4887 patients, published between 1982 and 2016, were included in this systematic review. The treatment effect observed indicated marginal benefit of NSAIDs over opioids in initial pain reduction at 30min (11 RCTs, n=1985, mean difference [MD] -5.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] -10.22 to -0.95; heterogeneity I²=81%). In the subgroup analyses by the route of administration, NSAIDs required fewer rescue treatments (seven RCTs, n=541, number needed to treat [NNT] 11, 95% CI 6-75) and had lower vomiting rates compared with opioids (five RCTs, n=531, NNT 5, 95% CI 4-8). Comparisons of NSAIDs with paracetamol showed no difference for both drugs at 30min (four RCTs, n=1325, MD -5.67, 95% CI -17.52 to 6.18, p=0.35; I²=89%). Patients treated with NSAIDs required fewer rescue treatments (two trials, n=1145, risk ratio 0.56, 95% CI 0.42-0.74, p<0.001; I²=0%).

CONCLUSIONS

NSAIDs were equivalent to opioids or paracetamol in the relief of acute renal colic pain at 30min. There was less vomiting and fewer requirements for rescue analgesia with NSAIDs compared with opioids. Patients treated with NSAIDs required less rescue analgesia compared with paracetamol. Despite observed heterogeneity among the included studies and the overall quality of evidence, the findings of a lower need for rescue analgesia and fewer adverse events, in conjunction with the practical advantages of ease of delivery, suggest that NSAIDs should be the preferred analgesic option for patients presenting to the emergency department with renal colic.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In kidney stone-related acute pain episodes in patients with adequate renal function, treatment with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs offers effective and most sustained pain relief, with fewer side effects, when compared with opioids or paracetamol.

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

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

Role of indomethacin in acute pain and inflammation management: a review of the literature

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are a class of analgesics that includes traditional nonselective and selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors that block the biosynthesis of prostaglandins and thromboxane. Indomethacin is a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug with potent antipyretic, analgesic, and anti-inflammatory activity that has been effectively used in the management of mild-to-moderate pain since the mid-1960s. It is commonly prescribed for the relief of acute gouty arthritis pain, but has demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of various other painful conditions. Numerous comparative studies have affirmed the clinical utility of indomethacin relative to other widely used analgesics. This review provides an historic overview of indomethacin and its efficacy compared with other commonly used analgesics, and discusses new indomethacin drug products.

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.

The Role of Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs in Renal Colic

NSAIDs provide optimal analgesia in renal colic due to the reduction in glomerular filtration and renal pelvic pressure, ureteric peristalsis and ureteric oedema. Prevention of glomerular afferent arteriolar vasodilatation renders these patients at risk of renal impairment. NSAIDs have the additional benefit of reducing the number of new colic episodes and preventing subsequent readmission to hospital. Despite recent work promoting the use of pharmacological agents to improve stone passage rates, NSAIDs do not appear to reduce the time to stone passage or increase the likelihood of stone passage in renal colic.

Celecoxib in the management of acute renal colic: a randomized controlled clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of celecoxib as an analgesic and medical expulsive agent in acute renal colic.

METHODS

A prospective randomized double-blind study was conducted on patients presenting with an obstructing ureteral calculus < 10 mm in largest diameter. Patients were randomized to 400 mg of celecoxib, followed by 200 mg every 12 hours for 10 days, or to placebo. Patients with a solitary kidney, renal insufficiency (CR > 1.8), urinary tract infection, or significant cardiovascular disease were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 57 patients provided consent of which 53 completed the study. Four patients were excluded from the analysis because of stone passage or withdrawal of consent before the first dose of study medication. No significant difference was noted in the spontaneous stone passage rate (celecoxib 55.2%, placebo 54.2%) and between celecoxib and placebo with regard to days to stone passage (7.0 vs 9.0, P = .6) or size of stone passed (3.9 vs 4.6 mm, P = .18). No significant difference was noted in pain analog scores (2.6 vs 3.5, P = .71) or narcotic doses (13.2 vs 13.6, P = .74). Furthermore, a 25% decrease in narcotic use (or 19 mg based on placebo mean) was outside the 80% one-sided confidence interval for the change in mean narcotic use between the 2 groups. Thus, it is unlikely (< 20%) that we missed a clinically significant beneficial effect of celecoxib on narcotic consumption because of sample size.

CONCLUSIONS

Celecoxib does not facilitate stone passage or decrease narcotic requirements in patients with acute renal colic.

[Diagnosis and therapy of acute ureteral colic]

Acute ureteral colic presents with a complex of acute and characteristic flank pain that usually indicates the presence of a stone in the urinary tract. Diagnosis and management of renal colic have undergone considerable evolution and advancement in recent years. The application of noncontrast helical computed tomography (CT) in patients with suspected ureteral colic is one major advance in the primary diagnostic process. The superior sensitivity and specificity of helical CT allow ureterolithiasis to be diagnosed without the potential side effects of contrast media. Initial management is based on three key concepts: (A) rational and fast diagnostic process (B) effective pain control (C) and understanding of the impact of stone location and size on the natural course of the disease and definitive urologic management. These concepts are discussed in this review with reference to contemporary literature.

Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Randomized Clinical Trial of Sublingual or Intramuscular Piroxicam in the Treatment of Renal Colic

AIMS

To investigate the therapeutic effect of the fast-dissolving dosage form (FDDF) of sublingual piroxicam on renal colic compared with the intramuscular (IM) injection form of the same agent in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial.

METHODS

80 patients were assigned to one of two treatment groups: Group 1 received 40 mg piroxicam FDDF sublingual tablets and IM injection of 2 ml distilled water. Group 2 received an IM injection of 40 mg piroxicam and two sublingual tablets of placebo. At baseline and 30 min after the medication, vital signs were recorded and the pain intensity was evaluated by the patient using a numeric rating scale.

RESULTS

The overall efficacy of the treatment was 90%. There was no significant difference with respect to the required rescue treatment (p = 0.328), pain relapse within 24 h (p = 0.434) and the decrease in vital signs and numeric rating scale in both groups (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The piroxicam FDDF tablet was found to be as effective as the IM injection form of the same agent in the treatment of renal colic. The FDDF is a good alternative to the parenteral form because of its earlier onset of action and ease of self-administration which increases patient compliance.

Medical therapy to facilitate urinary stone passage: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Medical therapies to ease urinary-stone passage have been reported, but are not generally used. If effective, such therapies would increase the options for treatment of urinary stones. To assess efficacy, we sought to identify and summarise all randomised controlled trials in which calcium-channel blockers or alpha blockers were used to treat urinary stone disease.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Pre-MEDLINE, CINAHL, and EMBASE, as well as scientific meeting abstracts, up to July, 2005. All randomised controlled trials in which calcium-channel blockers or alpha blockers were used to treat ureteral stones were eligible for inclusion in our analysis. Data from nine trials (number of patients=693) were pooled. The main outcome was the proportion of patients who passed stones. We calculated the summary estimate of effect associated with medical therapy use using random-effects and fixed-effects models.

FINDINGS

Patients given calcium-channel blockers or alpha blockers had a 65% (absolute risk reduction=0.31 95% CI 0.25-0.38) greater likelihood of stone passage than those not given such treatment (pooled risk ratio 1.65; 95% CI 1.45-1.88). The pooled risk ratio for alpha blockers was 1.54 (1.29-1.85) and for calcium-channel blockers with steroids was 1.90 (1.51-2.40). The proportion of heterogeneity not explained by chance alone was 28%. The number needed to treat was 4.

INTERPRETATION

Although a high-quality randomised trial is necessary to confirm its efficacy, our findings suggest that medical therapy is an option for facilitation of urinary-stone passage for patients amenable to conservative management, potentially obviating the need for surgery.

Intravenous Morphine Plus Ketorolac Is Superior to Either Drug Alone for Treatment of Acute Renal Colic

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To study the efficacy of intravenous ketorolac, morphine, and both drugs in combination in reducing pain in acute renal colic.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial in an urban, teaching emergency department. Patients aged 18 to 55 years and with a clinical diagnosis of acute renal colic and a pain rating greater than 5 on a 10-cm visual analogue scale or at least "moderate pain" on a 4-category verbal pain scale were eligible for inclusion. Exclusion criteria were contraindication to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or opiates, a history of drug dependence, presence of peritonitis, or analgesics within 6 hours of presentation. Patients received either morphine 5 mg at time zero and 5 mg at 20 minutes, ketorolac 15 mg at time zero and 15 mg at 20 minutes, or a combination of both. Primary outcomes were pain reduction and the need for rescue analgesia at 40 minutes.

RESULTS

Of the 555 consecutive patients screened, 158 patients met inclusion criteria and 130 patients were randomized during 6 months. Mean difference in change in pain score (visual analog scale 40 minutes minus visual analog scale 0 minutes) between combination group and morphine group was 1.8 cm (95% confidence interval [CI] -3.3 to -0.1) and, compared to the ketorolac group, was 2.2 cm (95% CI -3.7 to -0.5); P<.003. Patients with combination therapy were less likely to require rescue morphine compared to the morphine group (odds ratio 0.2; 95% CI 0.1 to 0.7; P=.007).

CONCLUSION

A combination of morphine and ketorolac offered pain relief superior to either drug alone and was associated with a decreased requirement for rescue analgesia.

Obstruction alters the effect of prostaglandin E2 on ureteral contractility

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Although our understanding of ureteral physiology during acute obstruction remains limited, we believe that prostanoids (prostaglandins [PGs], thromboxanes, prostacyclins) play a major role in modulation of ureteral contractility and that inhibition of prostanoid synthesis causes substantial reduction in in-vitro and in-vivo ureteral contractility rates. The purpose of this study was to determine the in-vitro effects of PGE2 on chronically obstructed human and acutely obstructed porcine ureters.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Female pigs underwent unilateral laparoscopic ureteral obstruction. Following 1, 2, 6, 24, and 48 hours of obstruction (n = 3 at all points), animals were euthanized, and obstructed, contralateral nonobstructed, and normal (from unobstructed pigs) ureters were harvested. Chronically obstructed human ureter was obtained from subjects who underwent nephrectomy to remove nonfunctioning kidneys. Normal human ureter was obtained from the discarded portion of excess distal ureter in patients undergoing elective donor nephrectomy. Rings 4 to 5 mm long were suspended in aerated Krebs buffer, and their spontaneous contractions and contraction in response to various concentrations of PGE2 were recorded.

RESULTS

Prostaglandin E2 increased contractility in chronically obstructed human ureters. In acutely obstructed porcine ureteral segments, low concentrations of PGE2 inhibited ureteral contractility in a dose-dependent fashion, similar to controls. At higher concentrations of PGE2, contractility was increased. This increase was more pronounced with longer intervals of obstruction in a time-dependent manner.

CONCLUSION

Prostaglandin E2 increased contractility in obstructed ureters while relaxing normal and nonobstructed ureters. The response to PGE2 was accentuated by a longer duration of obstruction. Prostaglandin E2 may be a unique target for pharmacologic modulation in the treatment of symptoms associated with acute urinary obstruction.

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

BACKGROUND

Renal colic is a common cause of acute severe pain. Both opioids and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are recommended for treatment, but the relative efficacy of these drugs is uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the benefits and disadvantages of NSAIDs and opioids for the management of pain in acute renal colic.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Renal Group's specialised register (May 2003), the Cochrane Central Register of Randomised Controlled Trials (CENTRAL - The Cochrane Library issue 2, 2003), MEDLINE (1966 - 31 January 2003), EMBASE (1980 - 31 January 2003) and handsearched reference lists of retrieved articles. Most recent search date: January 2005

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any opioid with any NSAID, regardless of dose or route of administration were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data was extracted and quality assessed independently by two reviewers, with differences resolved by discussion. Dichotomous outcomes are reported as relative risk (RR) and measurements on continuous scales are reported as weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals. Subgroup analysis by study quality, drug type and drug route have been performed where possible to explore reasons for heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty trials from nine countries with a total of 1613 participants were identified. Both NSAIDs and opioids lead to clinically significant falls in patient-reported pain scores. Due to unexplained heterogeneity these results could not be pooled although 10/13 studies reported lower pain scores in patients receiving NSAIDs. Patients treated with NSAIDs were significantly less likely to require rescue medication (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.93, P = 0.007), though most of these trials used pethidine. The majority of trials showed a higher incidence of adverse events in patients treated with opioids, but there was significant heterogeneity between studies so the results could not be pooled. There was significantly less vomiting in patients treated with NSAIDs (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.53, P < 0.00001). In particular, patients receiving pethidine had a much higher rate of vomiting compared with patients receiving NSAIDs. Gastrointestinal bleeding and renal impairment were not reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Both NSAIDs and opioids can provide effective analgesia in acute renal colic. Opioids are associated with a higher incidence of adverse events, particularly vomiting. Given the high rate of vomiting associated with the use of opioids, particularly pethidine, and the greater likelihood of requiring further analgesia, we recommend that if an opioid is to be used it should not be pethidine.

Celecoxib inhibits ureteral contractility and prostanoid release

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and potency of clinically available celecoxib for inhibition of ureteral contractility and prostanoid release. We have previously reported that the selective cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitor NS-398 inhibits ureteral contractility.

METHODS

We evaluated the release of prostaglandin (PG) E2, F2alpha, D2, thromboxane B2 (a thromboxane2 metabolite), and 6-keto-PGF1alpha (a prostacyclin metabolite) by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry from porcine ureters in the presence and absence of tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha), a putative cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inducer. PGE2 and PGF2alpha were the prostanoids released in greatest quantity in response to TNF-alpha. We subsequently measured spontaneous contractility and prostanoid release in porcine ureters treated with 0.1, 1.0, or 10 microM concentrations of indomethacin (nonselective COX inhibitor), NS-398, celecoxib, or 0.1% dimethyl sulfoxide (vehicle) for 2 hours. Ureteral contractility and prostanoid release were measured every 15 minutes after the addition of the various compounds. We also treated ureters with 10 ng/mL TNF-alpha and all three COX inhibitors or dimethyl sulfoxide for 2 and 4 hours and measured the PGE2 and PGF2alpha release.

RESULTS

Celecoxib, indomethacin, and NS-398 inhibited ureteral contractility and prostanoid release with similar efficacy and potency. All three compounds also reduced TNF-alpha-induced prostanoid release to control levels at concentrations as low as 0.1 microM.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data have indicated that celecoxib and indomethacin inhibit PG release by the ureter to a similar degree, even in the presence of COX-2 induction. Animal experiments and clinical trials evaluating the safety and efficacy of celecoxib for the treatment of symptomatic ureteral obstruction are warranted.

Systematic review of the relative efficacy of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and opioids in the treatment of acute renal colic

OBJECTIVE

To examine the relative benefits and disadvantages of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opioids for the management of acute renal colic.

DATA SOURCES

Cochrane Renal Group's specialised register, Cochrane central register of controlled trials, Medline, Embase, and reference lists of retrieved articles.

REVIEW METHODS

Randomised controlled trials comparing any opioid with any NSAID in acute renal colic if they reported any of the following outcomes: patient rated pain, time to pain relief, need for rescue analgesia, rate of recurrence of pain, and adverse events.

RESULTS

20 trials totalling 1613 participants were identified. Both NSAIDs and opioids led to clinically important reductions in patient reported pain scores. Pooled analysis of six trials showed a greater reduction in pain scores for patients treated with NSAIDs than with opioids. Patients treated with NSAIDs were significantly less likely to require rescue analgesia (relative risk 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.61 to 0.93). Most trials showed a higher incidence of adverse events in patients treated with opioids. Compared with patients treated with opioids, those treated with NSAIDs had significantly less vomiting (0.35, 0.23 to 0.53). Pethidine was associated with a higher rate of vomiting.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients receiving NSAIDs achieve greater reductions in pain scores and are less likely to require further analgesia in the short term than those receiving opioids. Opioids, particularly pethidine, are associated with a higher rate of vomiting.

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

BACKGROUND

Renal colic is a common cause of acute severe pain. Both opioids and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are recommended for treatment, but the relative efficacy of these drugs is uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the benefits and disadvantages of NSAIDs and opioids for the management of pain in acute renal colic.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Renal Group's specialised register (May 2003), the Cochrane Central Register of Randomised Controlled Trials (CENTRAL - The Cochrane Library issue 2, 2003), MEDLINE (1966 - 31 January 2003), EMBASE (1980 - 31 January 2003) and handsearched reference lists of retrieved articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any opioid with any NSAID, regardless of dose or route of administration were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data was extracted and quality assessed independently by two reviewers, with differences resolved by discussion. Dichotomous outcomes are reported as relative risk (RR) and measurements on continuous scales are reported as weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals. Subgroup analysis by study quality, drug type and drug route have been performed where possible to explore reasons for heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty trials from nine countries with a total of 1613 participants were identified. Both NSAIDs and opioids lead to clinically significant falls in patient-reported pain scores. Due to unexplained heterogeneity these results could not be pooled although 10/13 studies reported lower pain scores in patients receiving NSAIDs. Patients treated with NSAIDs were significantly less likely to require rescue medication (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.93, P = 0.007), though most of these trials used pethidine. The majority of trials showed a higher incidence of adverse events in patients treated with opioids, but there was significant heterogeneity between studies so the results could not be pooled. There was significantly less vomiting in patients treated with NSAIDs (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.53, P < 0.00001). In particular, patients receiving pethidine had a much higher rate of vomiting compared with patients receiving NSAIDs. Gastrointestinal bleeding and renal impairment were not reported.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Both NSAIDs and opioids can provide effective analgesia in acute renal colic. Opioids are associated with a higher incidence of adverse events, particularly vomiting. Given the high rate of vomiting associated with the use of opioids, particularly pethidine, and the greater likelihood of requiring further analgesia, we recommend that if an opioid is to be used it should not be pethidine.

Intramuscular Etofenamate versus Diclofenac in the Relief of Renal Colic

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and adverse effects of intramuscular etofenamate and intramuscular diclofenac in the relief of acute renal colic.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A multicentre, randomised, single-blind study was performed in 119 patients admitted to the emergency room for renal colic. Patients were assigned to treatment with either etofenamate 1000mg or diclofenac 75mg, both administered intramuscularly. Pain was self-assessed using a 4-point verbal rating scale (VRS) and a visual analogue scale (VAS) just before drug administration and 30, 60, 120 and 240 min later.

RESULTS

The two groups were similar with regard to baseline characteristics. The percentages of patients who reported an improvement in the VRS at 60 min post-administration (primary variable) were 84.5% with etofenamate and 83.3% with diclofenac (p = 0.73). At the other timepoints (30, 120 and 240 min), the proportions of patients improved were, respectively, 69.5%, 82.6% and 79.3% in the etofenamate group, and 75.0%, 81.7% and 80.0% in the diclofenac group. The VAS score showed a statistically significant improvement in both groups, but no differences between groups were found.Analgesic rescue medication was required by 11 (18.6%) patients in the etofenamate group and by 12 (20.0%) patients in the diclofenac group. Mild to moderate adverse events were reported by 3.4% of patients receiving etofenamate and by 5.0% of patients receiving diclofenac.

CONCLUSION

Etofenamate and diclofenac were similarly effective and tolerated in the relief of acute renal colic.

Renal colic: new concepts related to pathophysiology, diagnosis and treatment

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To give new insights into the pathophysiology, diagnosis and treatment of acute renal colic caused by a stone disease.

RECENT FINDINGS

Traditional intravenous pyelography is no longer the primary method of investigation in patients with renal colic. If the patient has a history of previous attacks of renal colic and stone disease the recommended diagnostic approach is to start with plain abdominal radiography and ultrasonography together with Doppler ultrasonography. Noncontrast computerized tomography is reserved for unsolved problems. If the patient has no history of stone disease or has atypical clinical presentation it is better to start with noncontrast computerized tomography. Intravenous pyelography is indispensable if an endoscopic or open intervention is required. Magnetic resonance imaging is a promising method of investigation, particularly in pregnant women. Effective pain relief is achieved by the use of opioids, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs or desmopressin.

SUMMARY

The diagnostic approach to renal colic has recently been changed due to the introduction of new, noninvasive radiologic procedures such as Doppler ultrasonography, noncontrast computerized tomography and magnetic resonance imaging.

Extended emergency care for painful conditions

Painful conditions are a common cause for visits to emergency departments. Appropriate therapy often consists of sedating medications followed by a period of observation that is beneficial in assessing their effect. The cause of abdominal pain is frequently elusive, requiring prolonged testing and re-examination. Observation is particularly beneficial in assessing this condition, while certain other painful conditions are not suitable for emergency observation because of the need for prolonged treatment.

Acute pain and pain control: state of the art

Recognition and treatment of pain in the emergency department has undergone an evolution in the past decade. Emergency clinicians, educators, and researchers have begun to address the undertreatment of pain as well as challenge the long-standing dogmas concerning pain treatment. Well-described barriers, both psychological and educational, contribute to our providing inadequate pain relief. This state-of-the-art update describes the current perception of our practice with regard to pain relief and how it can be modified. Pain and pain control is such a broad and complex topic that only new advances and important principles relevant to the practice of emergency medicine are presented. Headache, pediatric pain, and procedural sedation and analgesia are not covered in this article as they will be addressed in future state-of-the-art articles.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs as adjuvant analgesics in cancer patients

The role of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is examined in the control of cancer pain with a particular focus on their use as adjuvants to opioids in advanced cancer pain. These agents have both a peripheral effect on inflammation and a role in attenuating central pain pathways. The possibility of obtaining the benefits of NSAIDs with fewer side-effects by using COX-2-specific agents is discussed. The gastrointestinal, renal, haemostatic, cognitive and hypersensitivity side-effects of NSAIDs are reviewed and their potential impact assessed. The evidence for the efficacy of NSAIDs as single agents for cancer pain is reviewed together with the nine papers which have reported the effects of NSAIDs as adjuvants to opioids in cancer pain. All of these papers reported positive results of NSAIDs, but, in the absence of any randomized, double-blind controlled trials, where NSAIDs were used as adjuvants on a long-term basis alongside optimal opioid use, definite conclusions cannot be reached. Guidelines for the safe use of NSAIDs are suggested. Finally, suggestions for future research are made.

Efficacy of ketorolac tromethamine versus meperidine in the ED treatment of acute renal colic

To compare the efficacy of intramuscular ketorolac and meperidine in the emergency department (ED) treatment of renal colic, a prospective, controlled, randomized, double-blind trial was conducted in an academic ED with 76,000 annual visits. Participants were volunteer ED patients with a diagnosis of ureterolithiasis confirmed by intravenous pyelogram. Subjects were randomized 1:1 to receive a single intramuscular injection of either 60 mg ketorolac or 100 to 150 mg meperidine, based on weight. Of the 70 patients completing the trial, 33 received ketorolac and 37 received meperidine. Demographic characteristics and baseline pain scores of both groups were comparable (P = NS, Mann Whitney U). Ketorolac was significantly (P < .05) more effective than meperidine in reducing renal colic at 40, 60, and 90 minutes as measured on a 10-cm visual analogue scale. Similar proportions of patients in each group were given rescue analgesia and admitted. Of patients who were discharged home without rescue, those treated with ketorolac left the ED significantly earlier than those treated with meperidine (3.46 v 4.33 h, P < .05). These results show that intramuscular ketorolac as a single agent for renal colic is more effective than meperidine and promotes earlier discharge of renal colic patients from the ED.

Use of indomethacin for pain relief following scleral buckling surgery

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Patients undergoing scleral buckling and cryotherapy suffer from mild to moderate postoperative pain. As good pain relief facilitates post-operative ocular examination, as well as patient comfort and recovery, the authors designed a prospective randomised double masked trial to evaluate the efficacy of indomethacin as a satisfactory analgesic for such patients.

METHOD

Patients with a primary uncomplicated rhegmatogenous retinal detachment requiring scleral buckling and cryotherapy were randomly allocated to receive either indomethacin or placebo. A rectal suppository was administered 2 hours before surgery, followed by two capsules twice daily for 10 days. Pain relief was assessed with a linear graphic rating scale at the end of each day. Supplementary analgesia was allowed and recorded.

RESULTS

12 patients received indomethacin (group A) and 16 received placebo (group B). The extent of surgery was similar in both groups. One patient in group A, and two in group B withdrew after 3 days. The pain scores were converted to changes from the baseline (score on day 1), and the area under the curve calculated for each patient. The means of the areas were analysed with the Mann-Whitney test and showed that indomethacin caused a statistically significant reduction in pain score, both at 3 days (p = 0.04) and at 10 days (p = 0.014). There was no statistically significant difference in extra analgesic requirements between the two groups (p = 0.2).

CONCLUSIONS

Indomethacin is recommended for short to medium term pain relief following scleral buckling and cryotherapy.

Medical management of nephrolithiasis

About 1 out of 14 males and 1 out of 30 females are afflicted with kidney stones. In many of these patients, the disease is recurrent. Fortunately, our understanding of the disease and ability to treat renal stone disease has increased in the last decade. Parenteral NSAIDs have been shown to be as effective as narcotics in treating renal colic. Dietary and drug therapy after proper metabolic evaluation of patients with recurrent stones is beneficial in reducing the recurrence rate. New understanding of the role of diet and many organic inhibitors of crystallization in urine will further broaden the scope of management of this common disease.

Pearls, pitfalls, and updates for pain management

Pain management is one of the most challenging areas we encounter as emergency physicians. However, many of us fail to adequately meet this challenge. This article discusses frequently encountered pain syndromes and pain management options.