Does perioperative administration of rofecoxib improve analgesia after spine, breast and orthopaedic surgery?

Perioperative systemic nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in women undergoing breast surgery

BACKGROUND

Breast surgery encompasses oncologic, reconstructive, and cosmetic procedures. With the recent focus on the over-prescribing of opioids in the literature, it is important to assess the effectiveness and safety of non-opioid pain medication regimens including nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or NSAID pain medications. Clinicians have differing opinions on the safety of perioperative (relating to, occurring in, or being the period around the time of a surgical operation) NSAIDs for breast surgery given the unclear risk/benefit ratio. NSAIDs have been shown to decrease inflammation, pain, and fever, while potentially increasing the risks of bleeding complications.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of perioperative NSAID use versus non-NSAID analgesics (other pain medications) in women undergoing any form of breast surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Breast Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group (CBCG) Specialized Register, CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, Embase, The WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and Clinicaltrials.gov registries to 21 September 2020. Full articles were retrieved for potentially eligible trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) looking at perioperative NSAID use in women undergoing breast surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias, and certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. The main outcomes were incidence of breast hematoma within 90 days (requiring reoperation, interventional drainage, or no treatment) of breast surgery and pain intensity 24 hours following surgery, incidence rate or severity of postoperative nausea, vomiting or both, bleeding from any location within 90 days, need for blood transfusion, other side effects of NSAID use, opioid use within 24 hours of surgery, length of hospital stay, breast cancer recurrence, and non-prescribed NSAID use. Data were presented as risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes and standardized mean differences (SMDs) for continuous outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 12 RCTs with a total of 1596 participants. Seven studies compared NSAIDs (ketorolac, diclofenac, flurbiprofen, parecoxib and celecoxib) to placebo. Four studies compared NSAIDs (ketorolac, flurbiprofen, ibuprofen, and celecoxib) to other analgesics (morphine, hydrocodone, hydromorphone, fentanyl). One study compared NSAIDs (diclofenac) to no intervention. NSAIDs compared to placebo Most outcomes are judged to have low-certainty evidence unless stated otherwise. There may be little to no difference in the incidence of breast hematomas within 90 days of breast surgery (RR 0.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.05 to 2.02; 2 studies, 230 participants; I² = 0%). NSAIDs may reduce pain intensity 24 (± 12) hours following surgery compared to placebo (SMD -0.26, 95% CI -0.49 to -0.03; 3 studies, 310 participants; I² = 73%). There may be little to no difference in the incidence rates or severities of postoperative nausea, vomiting, or both (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.58 to 2.27; 4 studies, 939 participants; I² = 81%), bleeding from any location within 90 days (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.24; 2 studies, 251 participants; I² = 8%), or need for blood transfusion compared to placebo groups, but we are very uncertain (RR 4.62, 95% CI 0.23 to 91.34; 1 study, 48 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There may be no difference in other side effects (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.86; 2 studies, 251 participants; I² = 0%). NSAIDs may reduce opioid use within 24 hours of surgery compared to placebo (SMD -0.45, 95% CI -0.85 to -0.05; 4 studies, 304 participants; I² = 63%). NSAIDs compared to other analgesics There is little to no difference in the incidence of breast hematomas within 90 days of breast surgery, but we are very uncertain (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.99; 1 study, 100 participants; very low-certainty evidence). NSAIDs may reduce pain intensity 24 (± 12) hours following surgery (SMD -0.68, 95% CI -0.97 to -0.39; 3 studies, 200 participants; I² = 89%; low-certainty evidence) and probably reduce the incidence rates or severities of postoperative nausea, vomiting, or both compared to other analgesics (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.57; 3 studies, 128 participants; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). There is little to no difference in the development of bleeding from any location within 90 days of breast surgery or in other side effects, but we are very uncertain (bleeding: RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.99; 1 study, 100 participants; other side effects: RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.80; 1 study, 48 participants; very low-certainty evidence). NSAIDs may reduce opioid use within 24 hours of surgery compared to other analgesics (SMD -6.87, 95% CI -10.93 to -2.81; 3 studies, 178 participants; I² = 96%; low-certainty evidence). NSAIDs compared to no intervention There is little to no difference in pain intensity 24 (± 12) hours following surgery compared to no intervention, but we are very uncertain (SMD -0.54, 95% CI -1.09 to 0.00; 1 study, 60 participants; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low-certainty evidence suggests that NSAIDs may reduce postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting, and postoperative opioid use. However, there was very little evidence to indicate whether NSAIDs affect the rate of breast hematoma or bleeding from any location within 90 days of breast surgery, the need for blood transfusion and incidence of other side effects compared to placebo or other analgesics. High-quality large-scale RCTs are required before definitive conclusions can be made.

Pre-emptive and preventive NSAIDs for postoperative pain in adults undergoing all types of surgery

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pain is a common consequence of surgery and can have many negative perioperative effects. It has been suggested that the administration of analgesia before a painful stimulus may improve pain control. We defined pre-emptive nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs) as those given before surgery but not continued afterwards and preventive NSAIDs as those given before surgery and continued afterwards. These were compared to a control group given the NSAIDs after surgery instead of before surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of preventive and pre-emptive NSAIDs for reducing postoperative pain in adults undergoing all types of surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, AMED and CINAHL (up to June 2020). In addition, we searched for unpublished studies in three clinical trial databases, conference proceedings, grey literature databases, and reference lists of retrieved articles. We did not apply any restrictions on language or date of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel-group randomized controlled trials (RCTs) only. We included adult participants undergoing any type of surgery. We defined pre-emptive NSAIDs as those given before surgery but not continued afterwards and preventive NSAIDs as those given before surgery and continued afterwards. These were compared to a control group given the NSAIDs after surgery instead of before surgery. We included studies that gave the medication by any route but not given on the skin.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methods expected by Cochrane, as well as a novel publication bias test developed by our research group. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. Outcomes included acute postoperative pain (minimal clinically important difference (MCID): 1.5 on a 0-10 scale), adverse events of NSAIDs, nausea and vomiting, 24-hour morphine consumption (MCID: 10 mg reduction), time to analgesic request (MCID: one hour), pruritus, sedation, patient satisfaction, chronic pain and time to first bowel movement (MCID: 12 hours).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 71 RCTs. Seven studies are awaiting classification. We included 45 studies that evaluated pre-emptive NSAIDs and 26 studies that evaluated preventive NSAIDs. We considered only four studies to be at low risk of bias for most domains. The operations and NSAIDs used varied, although most studies were conducted in abdominal, orthopaedic and dental surgery. Most studies were conducted in secondary care and in low-risk participants. Common exclusions were participants on analgesic medications prior to surgery and those with chronic pain. Pre-emptive NSAIDs compared to post-incision NSAIDs For pre-emptive NSAIDs, there is probably a decrease in early acute postoperative pain (MD -0.69, 95% CI -0.97 to -0.41; studies = 36; participants = 2032; I² = 96%; moderate-certainty evidence). None of the included studies that reported on acute postoperative pain reported adverse events as an outcome. There may be little or no difference between the groups in short-term (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.34 to 2.94; studies = 2; participants = 100; I² = 0%; low-certainty evidence) or long-term nausea and vomiting (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.38; studies = 5; participants = 228; I² = 29%; low-certainty evidence). There may be a reduction in late acute postoperative pain (MD -0.22, 95% CI -0.44 to 0.00; studies = 28; participants = 1645; I² = 97%; low-certainty evidence). There may be a reduction in 24-hour morphine consumption with pre-emptive NSAIDs (MD -5.62 mg, 95% CI -9.00 mg to -2.24 mg; studies = 16; participants = 854; I² = 99%; low-certainty evidence) and an increase in the time to analgesic request (MD 17.04 minutes, 95% CI 3.77 minutes to 30.31 minutes; studies = 18; participants = 975; I² = 95%; low-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference in opioid adverse events such as pruritus (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.76; studies = 4; participants = 254; I² = 0%; low-certainty evidence) or sedation (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.68; studies = 4; participants = 281; I² = 0%; low-certainty evidence), although the number of included studies for these outcomes was small. No study reported patient satisfaction, chronic pain or time to first bowel movement for pre-emptive NSAIDs. Preventive NSAIDs compared to post-incision NSAIDs For preventive NSAIDs, there may be little or no difference in early acute postoperative pain (MD -0.14, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.12; studies = 18; participants = 1140; I² = 75%; low-certainty evidence). One study reported adverse events from NSAIDs (reoperation for bleeding) although the events were low which did not allow any meaningful conclusions to be drawn (RR 1.95; 95% CI 0.18 to 20.68). There may be little or no difference in rates of short-term (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.49 to 3.30; studies = 1; participants = 76; low-certainty evidence) or long-term (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.38; studies = 5; participants = 456; I² = 29%; low-certainty evidence) nausea and vomiting. There may be a reduction in late acute postoperative pain (MD -0.33, 95% CI -0.59 to -0.07; studies = 21; participants = 1441; I² = 81%; low-certainty evidence). There is probably a reduction in 24-hour morphine consumption (MD -1.93 mg, 95% CI -3.55 mg to -0.32 mg; studies = 16; participants = 1323; I² = 49%; moderate-certainty evidence). It is uncertain if there is any difference in time to analgesic request (MD 8.51 minutes, 95% CI -31.24 minutes to 48.27 minutes; studies = 8; participants = 410; I² = 98%; very low-certainty evidence). As with pre-emptive NSAIDs, there may be little or no difference in other opioid adverse events such as pruritus (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.09 to 3.35; studies = 3; participants = 211; I² = 0%; low-certainty evidence) and sedation (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.63; studies = 5; participants = 497; I² = 0%; low-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference in patient satisfaction (MD -0.42; 95% CI -1.09 to 0.25; studies = 1; participants = 72; moderate-certainty evidence). No study reported on chronic pain. There is probably little or no difference in time to first bowel movement (MD 0.00; 95% CI -15.99 to 15.99; studies = 1; participants = 76; moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was some evidence that pre-emptive and preventive NSAIDs reduce both pain and morphine consumption, although this was not universal for all pain and morphine consumption outcomes. Any differences found were not clinically significant, although we cannot exclude this in more painful operations. Moreover, without any evidence of reductions in opioid adverse effects, the clinical significance of these results is questionable although few studies reported these outcomes. Only one study reported clinically significant adverse events from NSAIDs administered before surgery and, therefore, we have very few data to assess the safety of either pre-emptive or preventive NSAIDs. Therefore, future research should aim to adhere to the highest methodology and be adequately powered to assess serious adverse events of NSAIDs and reductions in opioid adverse events.

Inflammation reduces osteoblast cytotoxicity induced by diclofenac: An in vitro study

BACKGROUND

Diclofenac and other NSAIDs are routinely used in the postoperative period. Their effect on fracture healing remains unclear and controversial.

OBJECTIVE

The primary outcome was to assess the potential cytotoxicity of clinically relevant concentrations of diclofenac on human osteoblasts.

DESIGN

Laboratory in vitro study.

SETTING

Institute of Physiology, Zurich, Center for Integrative Human Physiology, University of Zurich.

MATERIALS

Monolayers of human osteoblasts.

INTERVENTIONS

Exposure of human osteoblast monolayers to several concentrations of diclofenac, for different periods of time, with and without an artificially induced inflammatory process.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Cell count, cell viability, cell proliferation and apoptosis.

RESULTS

A concentration-mediated, time and exposure dependent cytotoxic effect of diclofenac-mediated apoptosis was observed. Stimulated inflammatory conditions seemed to reduce toxic effects.

CONCLUSION

Cytotoxic effects of diclofenac are exposure, time and concentration dependent. Simulating aspects of inflammatory conditions seems to increase resistance to diclofenac cytotoxicity, especially in the presence of higher concentration and longer exposure time.

Enhanced Recovery for Breast Reconstruction Surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Enhanced recovery pathways are a well-described perioperative healthcare program involving evidence-based interventions. Enhanced recovery is designed to standardize techniques such as drug selection and nerve blocks in order to speed recovery and reduce overall hospital costs.

RECENT FINDINGS

A PubMed literature search was performed for articles that included the terms enhanced recovery and breast reconstruction surgery. The present investigation summarizes enhanced recovery literature related to breast surgery with a focus on breast reconstruction. Enhanced recovery considerations discussed in this review include patient education, preadmission optimization, perforator flap planning, anesthetic techniques, optimized fasting, venous thrombosis prophylaxis, early mobilization, and antimicrobial prophylaxis.

Perioperative pain management following total joint arthroplasty: A review and update to an institutional pain protocol

As the rate of total joint arthroplasty increases with the aging population of the United States, new focus on decreasing opioid use through the development of multimodal pain regimens (MPRs) is becoming an important area of research. MPRs use different agents and modes of delivery in order to synergistically address pain at many levels of the pain pathway. MPRs include a combination of acetaminophen, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), gabapentinoids, opioids (short- and long-acting), spinal/epidural analgesia, regional nerve blocks, and local anesthetics. This review summarizes the available literature on major components of MPRs shown to be effective in the total joint arthroplasty population. Finally, the authors' preferred method for pain control in the TJA population is reviewed.

Consensus Review of Optimal Perioperative Care in Breast Reconstruction: Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) Society Recommendations

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery following surgery can be achieved through the introduction of evidence-based perioperative maneuvers. This review aims to present a consensus for optimal perioperative management of patients undergoing breast reconstructive surgery and to provide evidence-based recommendations for an enhanced perioperative protocol.

METHODS

A systematic review of meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and large prospective cohorts was conducted for each protocol element. Smaller prospective cohorts and retrospective cohorts were considered only when higher level evidence was unavailable. The available literature was graded by an international panel of experts in breast reconstructive surgery and used to form consensus recommendations for each topic. Each recommendation was graded following a consensus discussion among the expert panel. Development of these recommendations was endorsed by the Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Society.

RESULTS

High-quality randomized controlled trial data in patients undergoing breast reconstruction informed some of the recommendations; however, for most items, data from lower level studies in the population of interest were considered along with extrapolated data from high-quality studies in non-breast reconstruction populations. Recommendations were developed for a total of 18 unique enhanced recovery after surgery items and are discussed in the article. Key recommendations support use of opioid-sparing perioperative medications, minimal preoperative fasting and early feeding, use of anesthetic techniques that decrease postoperative nausea and vomiting and pain, use of measures to prevent intraoperative hypothermia, and support of early mobilization after surgery.

CONCLUSION

Based on the best available evidence for each topic, a consensus review of optimal perioperative care for patients undergoing breast reconstruction is presented.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, V.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of preemptive analgesia with bupivacaine in patients undergoing mastectomy for carcinoma of the breast

Background

In this prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded clinical trial we tested the hypothesis that preemptive analgesia with bupivacaine applied in the area of the surgical incision in patients undergoing mastectomy for breast cancer would reduce post-operative acute pain and would reduce the amount of analgesics used during surgery and in the post-operative period.

Material/Methods

Participants were assigned into 1 of 2 groups – with bupivacaine applied in the area of surgical incision or with placebo. We assessed the intraoperative consumption of fentanyl, the postoperative consumption of morphine delivered using a PCA method, and the subjective pain intensity according to VAS score reported by patients in the early post-operative period.

Results

Out of 121 consecutive cases qualified for mastectomy, 112 women were allocated randomly to 1 of 2 groups – group A (bupivacaine) and group B (placebo). The final study group comprised 106 breast cancer cases. Between the groups, a statistically significant difference was observed with respect to: lower fentanyl consumption during surgery (p=0.011), lower morphine (delivered by means of a PCA) consumption between the 4–12^th postoperative hours (p=0.02) and significantly lower pain intensity assessed according to VAS score at the 4^th and 12^th hours after surgery (p=0.004 and p=0.02 respectively) for the group A patients.

Conclusions

Preemptive analgesia application in the form of infiltration of the area of planned surgical incisions with bupivacaine in breast cancer patients undergoing mastectomy decreases post-operative pain sensation, limits the amount of fentanyl used during surgery, and reduces the demand for opiates in the hours soon after surgery.

Evidence-based review of enhancing postoperative recovery after breast surgery

BACKGROUND

The introduction of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols has revolutionized preoperative and postoperative care. To date, however, the principles of enhanced recovery have not been applied specifically to patients undergoing breast surgery.

METHODS

Based on the core features of ERAS, individual aspects of postoperative care in breast surgery were defined. A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library database was performed from 1980 to 2010 to determine the best evidence for perioperative care in oncological breast surgery. A graded recommendation based on the best level of evidence was then proposed for each feature of ERAS.

RESULTS

Twelve core features of enhanced recovery after breast surgery were identified. Use of the thoracic block, from both analgesic and anaesthetic viewpoints, is well supported by evidence and should be encouraged. Trials specific to breast surgery regarding aspects such as perioperative fasting, preanaesthetic medication, prevention of hypothermia and postdischarge support are scarce, and evidence was extrapolated from non-breast trials. Trials on postoperative analgesia and prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in breast surgery are generally of small numbers. In addition, there is heterogeneity between studies.

CONCLUSION

This review suggests that the principles of enhanced recovery can be adopted in breast surgery. A 12-point protocol is proposed for prospective evaluation.

Single dose oral rofecoxib for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Editor's note: The anti-inflammatory drug rofecoxib (Vioxx) was withdrawn from the market at the end of September 2004 after it was shown that long-term use (greater than 18 months) could increase the risk of heart attack and stroke in a study of secondary prevention of adenoma recurrence. Further information is available at www.vioxx.com.Rofecoxib is a selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor previously licensed for treating acute and chronic pain; it was associated with fewer gastrointestinal adverse events than conventional NSAIDs. An earlier Cochrane review (Barden 2005) showed that rofecoxib is at least as effective as conventional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for postoperative pain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of rofecoxib in single oral doses for moderate and severe postoperative pain.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Oxford Pain Relief Database for studies to June 2009.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double blind, placebo-controlled trials of single dose orally administered rofecoxib in adults with moderate to severe acute postoperative pain.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Pain relief or pain intensity data were extracted and converted into the dichotomous outcome of number of participants with at least 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours, from which relative risk and number needed to treat to benefit (NNT) were calculated. Numbers of participants using rescue medication over specified time periods, and time to use of rescue medication, were sought as additional measures of efficacy. Information on adverse events and withdrawals was collected.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty new studies and seven from the earlier review met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-four studies were in dental surgery and three in other types of surgery. In total, 2636 participants were treated with rofecoxib 50 mg, 20 with rofecoxib 500 mg, and 1251 with placebo. The NNT for at least 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours with rofecoxib 50 mg was 2.2 (2.0 to 2.3) in all studies combined, 1.9 (1.8 to 2.0) in dental studies, and 6.8 (4.6 to 13) in other types of surgery. The median time to use of rescue medication was 14 hours for rofecoxib 50 mg and 2 hours for placebo. Significantly fewer participants used rescue medication following rofecoxib 50 mg than with placebo. Adverse events did not differ from placebo.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Rofecoxib 50 mg (two to four times the standard daily dose for chronic pain) is an effective single dose oral analgesic for acute postoperative pain in adults, with a relatively long duration of action.

Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs for postoperative pain management after lumbar spine surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECT

The authors undertook this meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in addition to opioid analgesics on perioperative pain management in lumbar spine surgery.

METHODS

The authors searched MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica (EMBASE), The Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Allied and Complementary Medicine (AMED), and Science Citation Index Expanded databases. In addition, they manually searched key journals and their references. They included randomized trials comparing the use of NSAIDs in addition to opioid analgesics versus opioid analgesics alone after posterior lumbar discectomy, laminectomy, or spinal fusion. Two independent reviewers performed an assessment of the quality of the methods.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies comprising 400 patients who received NSAIDs in addition to opioid analgesics and 389 patients receiving opioid analgesics alone were included. Patients receiving NSAIDs in addition to opioid analgesics had lower pain scores and consumed fewer opioids than the group receiving opioid analgesics alone. There was no difference in the incidence of adverse effects.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis provides evidence that the addition of NSAIDs to opioid analgesics in lumbar spine surgery provided better pain control than opioid analgesics alone.

Effect of parecoxib on postoperative pain after lumbar spine surgery: a bicenter, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial

STUDY DESIGN

A bicenter randomized, patients, healthcare providers, and data collectors blind placebo-controlled trial in multimodal analgesia for postoperative lumbar spine surgery was conducted.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and safety of parecoxib on postoperative pain management after posterior lumbar spine surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Systematic reviews suggest that cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors are an effective treatment for acute postoperative pain. However, previous trials on lumbar spine surgery showed equivocal efficacy of cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors for postoperative pain relief.

METHODS

In this study, 120 patients undergoing posterior lumbar discectomy, spinal decompression, or spinal fusion were stratified based on the surgical procedure to 3 groups (n = 40) and randomly allocated to receive multidoses of parecoxib 40 mg/dose or placebo. Efficacy was assessed by total morphine used from patient-controlled analgesic pump, pain intensity, pain relief, and the patient's subjective rating of the medication.

RESULTS

Parecoxib 40 mg reduced the total amount of morphine required over 48 hours by 39% relative morphine reduction compared with placebo (P = 0.0001). Pain at rest was reduced by 30% (P = 0.0001). Ninety percent of patients given parecoxib experienced at least 50% maximum total pain relief compared with 58% treated with placebo. The number-needed-to-treat for 1 patient to have at least half pain relief was 3.1 (2.0-4.6). Patients' subjective rating of the medication was described as "excellent, good, and fair" by 48%, 43%, and 8% in the parecoxib group, respectively, compared with 21%, 50%, and 28% of placebo patients (P = 0.004). Overall adverse effects of patients receiving parecoxib and morphine were comparable to those receiving morphine alone.

CONCLUSION

The present study demonstrates that the perioperative administration of parecoxib with patient-controlled analgesic morphine after lumber spine surgery resulted in significantly improved postoperative analgesic management as defined by reduction in opioid requirement, lower pain scores, and higher patients' subjective rating of the medication.

Preventive effects of perioperative parecoxib on post-discectomy pain

BACKGROUND

Cyclooxygenase inhibitor treatment is viewed increasingly critical because of safety considerations, and there are several open questions on their optimal use.

METHODS

In a randomized placebo-controlled study in 320 patients undergoing discectomy, we administered parecoxib 40 mg either perioperatively (before operation and after operation), after operation (first dose given in the evening after surgery), or before operation (single parecoxib dose given 45 min before surgery). We measured the main outcome variables: average pain score, morphine consumption, and opioid-related symptom distress at 25, 49, and 73 h after surgery.

RESULTS

Perioperative parecoxib significantly (i) improved the pain score compared with both placebo and postoperative parecoxib, (ii) decreased morphine consumption, and (iii) reduced the opioid-related symptom distress score. Neither a single preoperative dose nor postoperative parecoxib (first dose given in the evening after surgery) significantly improved morphine's analgesic effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative parecoxib compared with postoperative parecoxib improves post-discectomy pain and results in a reduction in adverse effects associated with opioid therapy. Postoperative parecoxib, or a single pre-incisional parecoxib dose, does not significantly improve post-discectomy pain or opioid side-effects up to 3 days after surgery.

Endogenous opiates and behavior: 2006

This paper is the 29th consecutive installment of the annual review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system, now spanning 30 years of research. It summarizes papers published during 2006 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides, opioid receptors, opioid agonists and opioid antagonists. The particular topics that continue to be covered include the molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors related to behavior (Section 2), and the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia (Section 3); stress and social status (Section 4); tolerance and dependence (Section 5); learning and memory (Section 6); eating and drinking (Section 7); alcohol and drugs of abuse (Section 8); sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology (Section 9); mental illness and mood (Section 10); seizures and neurological disorders (Section 11); electrical-related activity and neurophysiology (Section 12); general activity and locomotion (Section 13); gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions (Section 14); cardiovascular responses (Section 15); respiration and thermoregulation (Section 16); and immunological responses (Section 17).