Effect of Topical Morphine (Mouthwash) on Oral Pain Due to Chemotherapy- and/or Radiotherapy-Induced Mucositis: A Randomized Double-Blinded Study

Efficacy and Safety of Topical Morphine: A Narrative Review

Background. Opioids are the cornerstone of the therapy used in both acute and chronic pain syndromes to treat pain of moderate to severe intensity. The knowledge that opioid receptors also occur in other tissues outside the central nervous system has created a possibility for the topical use of opioids. Thus, local analgesia may be obtained without systemic adverse effects. Methods. A narrative review of scientific papers discussing the topical use of morphine was conducted. For this purpose, the PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, and Mendeley databases were searched. Results. The current knowledge on topical morphine does not allow for its recommended use in everyday medical practice, but suggests it may be effective, particularly in the treatment of ulcers and erosions of inflammatory etiology and painful skin lesions including persistent post-mastectomy pain due to breast cancer. Conclusions. Topical morphine has its place beside other analgesics. An important issue is the practical possibility to meet the demand for topical formulations, which is limited by technical difficulties.

Evaluation of topical morphine for treatment of oral mucositis in cancer patients

Introduction

Oral mucositis is a painful side effect to chemotherapy. Orally applied opioids may offer analgesia with fewer side effects than systemic opioids.

Methods

A randomized trial comparing the analgesic effect of a morphine oromucosal solution (OM) to placebo and a positive control group receiving intravenous (IV) morphine as an add-on treatment to morphine patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) in a mixed population of paediatric and adult haematology patients. All patients in the study were equipped with a morphine PCA pump and the participating patients were instructed to use this pump as an escape. Primary outcome was morphine consumption (mg/kg/hour) on the PCA pump. Secondary outcomes included pain intensity difference at rest and when performing oral hygiene, time to first PCA bolus, nutrition intake and adverse events.

Findings

A total of 60 patients (38 children <18 years) were randomized. Thirty patients were allocated to morphine OM/placebo IV (group MO), 15 patients to placebo OM/morphine IV (group MI) and 15 patients to placebo OM/placebo IV (group P). The median morphine consumption in the MO group (22.7 mcg/kg/hour 95% confidence interval (CI) 19.4-29.4 mcg/kg/hour, p = 0.38) was not significantly different from the placebo group (24.6 mcg/kg/hour 95% CI 16.8-34.4 mcg/kg/hour, p = 0.44) or the MI group (13.7 mcg/kg/hour 95% CI 9.7-37.8 mcg/kg/hour). For the secondary outcomes, the analysis of summed pain intensity difference after the first, third and fourth administrations of study medication indicated a reduction in pain for the MI group compared to the P and MO groups. No serious adverse events were reported.

Conclusion

The findings indicate that the analgesic effect of peripherally applied morphine is not significantly different from placebo, and parenteral opioids should continue to be the standard of care.

Effects of an Indomethacin Oral Spray on Pain Due to Oral Mucositis in Cancer Patients Treated With Radiotherapy and Chemotherapy: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial (JORTC-PAL04)

CONTEXT

Oral mucositis (OM) pain due to anticancer chemo- and radiotherapy has a very negative impact on patient quality of life. However, no high-quality studies have been performed regarding the analgesic efficacy of indomethacin (IM) oral spray for OM pain.

OBJECTIVES

This randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial aimed to evaluate the analgesic efficacy of IM oral spray for OM pain due to anticancer chemo- and radiotherapy.

METHODS

From July 2015 to December 2016, we enrolled adult cancer patients with OM pain that was due to anticancer chemo- or radiotherapy and was rated 4 or higher on Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Item 5. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either IM oral spray or placebo. The primary endpoint was the change in the BPI Item 6 ("current pain") score from before to 30 minutes after treatment. Secondary endpoints were the areas under the curves of BPI Item 6 at 15, 60, 120, 180, and 240 minutes after treatment; five items related to meals and conversation from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire, Head and Neck Module 35; the Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement (CGI-I) scale; and adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 60 patients were assigned to receive IM oral spray (n = 33) or placebo spray (n = 27). The average change in the BPI item 6 score from before to 30 minutes after treatment was -1.85 (95% confidence interval: -2.37 to -1.32) in the IM spray group and -0.59 (-1.02 to -0.16) in the placebo group, indicating a significant difference (-1.26, -1.94 to -0.57, P < 0.01). The pain improvement persisted for 180 minutes. The intergroup differences in ability to drink liquids, ease in conversing, and CGI-I were all significant (P = 0.03, P = 0.02, and P < 0.01, respectively). No serious adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSION

IM oral spray alleviated short-term OM pain due to anticancer chemo- and radiotherapy, and may reduce the difficulty in eating meals.

Peripherally acting opioid analgesics and peripherally-induced analgesia

The management of pain, particularly chronic pain, is still an area of medical need. In this context, opioids remain a gold standard for the treatment of pain. However, significant side effects, mainly of central origin, limit their clinical use. Here, we review recent progress to improve the therapeutic and safety profiles of opioids for pain management. Characterization of peripheral opioid-mediated pain mechanisms have been a key component of this process. Several studies identified peripheral µ, δ, and κ opioid receptors (MOR, DOR, and KOR, respectively) and nociceptin/orphanin FQ (NOP) receptors as significant players of opioid-mediated antinociception, able to achieve clinically significant effects independently of any central action. Following this, particularly from a medicinal chemistry point of view, main efforts have been directed towards the peripheralization of opioid receptor agonists with the objective of optimizing receptor activity and minimizing central exposure and the associated undesired effects. These activities have allowed the characterization of a great variety of compounds and investigational drugs that show low central nervous system (CNS) penetration (and therefore a reduced side effect profile) yet maintaining the desired opioid-related peripheral antinociceptive activity. These include highly hydrophilic/amphiphilic and massive molecules unable to easily cross lipid membranes, substrates of glycoprotein P (a extrusion pump that avoids CNS penetration), nanocarriers that release the analgesic agent at the site of inflammation and pain, and pH-sensitive opioid agonists that selectively activate at those sites (and represent a new pharmacodynamic paradigm). Hopefully, patients with pain will benefit soon from the incorporation of these new entities.

Topical Treatment of Oral Mucositis in Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Evidence-based protocols of topical therapy for oral mucositis (OM) induced by chemoradiotherapy (CRT) are continuously established and updated. Thus, the present systematic review aims to evaluate the scientific literature in terms of effectiveness of topical treatment of OM in cancer patients undergoing CRT.  Materials and Methods: This systematic review was based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Checklist. Randomized clinical trials were identified through electronic database searches on CINAHL, Cochrane Library, LILACS, Livivo, PubMed, SCOPUS, and Web of Science. Grey literature was also assessed on Google Scholar, Open Grey, and ProQuest. The risk of bias in the included studies was assessed by the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool.

RESULTS

Twenty-three randomized clinical trials (n=1169 patients) met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-three different topical agents were examined and categorized into five groups: analgesics (30.4%), natural agents (21.7%), other topical agents (21.7%), antimicrobial agents (17.4%), and growth factors (8.8%). Of the included studies, 50% presented a resolution of OM within 14 days. Topical natural agents yielded good results with average resolution time of 3-7 days. The included studies generally demonstrated that patients treated with mouthwashes presented superior benefits compared to the control, depending on OM severity.

CONCLUSION

Topical agents effectively reduced the severity of OM lesions and pain intensity in patients receiving chemoradiotherapy, although the effects varied by agent type. However, the heterogeneity in the results of these topical intervention studies underscores the need for standardized clinical trial methodologies.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Topical agents were effective in patients with severe OM lesions receiving chemoradiotherapy and are a good alternative of home care in relation to pain control, reduction of inflammation and consequent improvement in quality of life.<br />.

Mucoadhesive Electrospun Fibre-Based Technologies for Oral Medicine

Oral disease greatly affects quality of life, as the mouth is required for a wide range of activities including speech, food and liquid consumption. Treatment of oral disease is greatly limited by the dose forms that are currently available, which suffer from short contact times, poor site specificity, and sensitivity to mechanical stimulation. Mucoadhesive devices prepared using electrospinning offer the potential to address these challenges by allowing unidirectional site-specific drug delivery through intimate contact with the mucosa and with high surface areas to facilitate drug release. This review will discuss the range of electrospun mucoadhesive devices that have recently been reported to address oral inflammatory diseases, pain relief, and infections, as well as new treatments that are likely to be enabled by this technology in the future.

Ibuprofen gargle for chemo- or Chemoradiotherapy-induced Oral Mucositis: a feasibility study

Background

Oral mucositis frequently occurs in cancer patients treated with chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy (CRT). This study examined the safety and efficacy of ibuprofen gargle in healthy volunteers and patients with chemotherapy- and concomitant CRT-induced oral mucositis.

Methods

We enrolled healthy volunteers and patients with chemotherapy- and CRT-induced oral mucositis. In cohort I, single and multiple doses of ibuprofen gargle (0.6% or 1.0%) were administered to healthy volunteers on day 1 and days 4–10. In cohort II, multiple doses of ibuprofen gargle (0.6%) were administered to patients with complicated grade 2–3 oral mucositis based on the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0. The primary endpoint of cohort I was the treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) as defined by CTCAE version 4.0. The primary endpoint of cohort II was the change in the visual analogue scale (VAS) pain score from before to 15 min after gargle use on day 3. The incidence and severity of TRAEs were assessed based on the CTCAE version 4.0 and a subjective rating scale completed by healthy volunteers and patients.

Results

In cohort I, 9 of 10 healthy volunteers were evaluable for safety. All 9 healthy volunteers reported the TRAE of oral irritation with single or multiple use of the gargle. In cohort II, 10 patients were enrolled and evaluable for safety and 7 of 10 patients were evaluable for efficacy. The mean change in the VAS pain score from before to 15 min after using the gargle on day 3 was − 1.28 (95% confidence interval: − 2.06, − 0.51), and all patients experienced some degree of pain relief (range: − 0.2 to − 2.5). All 10 patients reported the TRAE of oral irritation. No other TRAEs of ibuprofen gargle were observed in the healthy volunteers and patients.

Conclusion

Despite oral irritation, the ibuprofen gargle appeared to be safe and effective for the pain related to chemo- or CRT-induced oral mucositis. However, ibuprofen-related oral irritation warrants further formulation improvement.

Trial registration

This study was registered with the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000014433).

Systematic review of antimicrobials, mucosal coating agents, anesthetics, and analgesics for the management of oral mucositis in cancer patients and clinical practice guidelines

PURPOSE

To update the clinical practice guidelines for the use of antimicrobials, mucosal coating agents, anesthetics, and analgesics for the prevention and/or treatment of oral mucositis (OM).

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted by the Mucositis Study Group of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO). The body of evidence for each intervention, in each cancer treatment setting, was assigned an evidence level. The findings were added to the database used to develop the 2014 MASCC/ISOO clinical practice guidelines. Based on the evidence level, the following guidelines were determined: Recommendation, Suggestion, and No Guideline Possible.

RESULTS

A total of 9 new papers were identified within the scope of this section, adding to the 62 papers reviewed in this section previously. A new Suggestion was made for topical 0.2% morphine for the treatment of OM-associated pain in head and neck (H&N) cancer patients treated with RT-CT (modification of previous guideline). A previous Recommendation against the use of sucralfate-combined systemic and topical formulation in the prevention of OM in solid cancer treatment with CT was changed from Recommendation Against to No Guideline Possible. Suggestion for doxepin and fentanyl for the treatment of mucositis-associated pain in H&N cancer patients was changed to No Guideline Possible.

CONCLUSIONS

Of the agents studied for the management of OM in this paper, the evidence supports a Suggestion in favor of topical morphine 0.2% in H&N cancer patients treated with RT-CT for the treatment of OM-associated pain.

Potential Therapeutic Effects of Gut Hormones, Ghrelin and Obestatin in Oral Mucositis

Chemotherapy and/or head and neck radiotherapy are frequently associated with oral mucositis. Oral pain, odynophagia and dysphagia, opioid use, weight loss, dehydration, systemic infection, hospitalization and introduction of a feeding tube should be mentioned as the main determinated effect of oral mucositis. Oral mucositis leads to a decreased quality of life and an increase in treatment costs. Moreover, oral mucositis is a life-threatening disease. In addition to its own direct life-threatening consequences, it can also lead to a reduced survival due to the discontinuation or dose reduction of anti-neoplasm therapy. There are numerous strategies for the prevention or treatment of oral mucositis; however, their effectiveness is limited and does not correspond to expectations. This review is focused on the ghrelin and obestatin as potentially useful candidates for the prevention and treatment of chemo- or/and radiotherapy-induced oral mucositis.

Topical morphine for treatment of cancer-related painful mucosal and cutaneous lesions: a double-blind, placebo-controlled cross-over clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

Painful mucosal and cutaneous lesions are often less responsive or even refractory to systemic opioid analgesics. There is evidence suggesting that the effectiveness of topical morphine be restricted to inflammatory pain. The studied groups were small and the observation period relatively short. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness and safety of topical morphine for pain related to mucosal lesions and skin ulcers.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study was a 14-day randomized placebo-controlled cross-over trial (RCT) with a 28-day follow-up open phase (OP). The trial was conducted in adult patients with localized cancer-related pain and treated with systemic opioids in an oncology center or home hospice. The patients administered 0.2% gel on the mucosal lesion or 0.2% ointment on the skin lesion by themselves, without restrictions regarding the number of doses per day. The primary measurements were mean pain intensity (MPI) and mean pain relief (MPR) on the numeric rating scale (NRS 0-10), and ITT analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Thirty-five patients were randomized to the RCT, and all of them completed 14-day observation. The MPI before the treatment was NRS 5.9 and decreased to 2.5 after morphine (p < 0.0001 vs. placebo). The MPR was 57% after morphine, and 77% of the patients using topical morphine obtained clinically significant (at least 50% of the starting value) pain relief, statistically different from placebo. The analgesic effect was sustained over the 28-day OP period (p = 0.00001). There were only 2 cases of moderate pruritus, and no other side effects were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Topical morphine was found to be a fast acting, highly effective, and safe medication for mucosal and skin lesions in palliative patients, with a sustainable pain relief effect over the 28-day observation period.

Radiation-Induced Oral Mucositis

Radiation-induced oral mucositis (RIOM) is a major dose-limiting toxicity in head and neck cancer patients. It is a normal tissue injury caused by radiation/radiotherapy (RT), which has marked adverse effects on patient quality of life and cancer therapy continuity. It is a challenge for radiation oncologists since it leads to cancer therapy interruption, poor local tumor control, and changes in dose fractionation. RIOM occurs in 100% of altered fractionation radiotherapy head and neck cancer patients. In the United Sates, its economic cost was estimated to reach 17,000.00 USD per patient with head and neck cancers. This review will discuss RIOM definition, epidemiology, impact and side effects, pathogenesis, scoring scales, diagnosis, differential diagnosis, prevention, and treatment.

Topical application of morphine for wound healing and analgesia in patients with oral lichen planus: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of topical morphine on erosive/ulcerative lesions in patients with oral lichen planus (OLP). Previous studies reported on an enhanced remission of skin wounds when morphine was applied topically.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was single-center, prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, multi-arm (3), phase II study (RCT). Patients diagnosed with erosive and/or ulcerative OLP applied 0.2 or 0.4 mg morphine dissolved in glycerine, three times a day for 5 days. The primary outcome was the extent of healing. Secondary outcomes were as follows: (1) effect on pain, (2) presence and severity of opioid-related central and local side effects, (3) whether patients required 'rescue medication' for treatment of pain, and (4) total intake of test substance.

RESULTS

A total of 123 patients were screened for eligibility, 45 patients were recruited into the study, and 43 completed it. Patients applied a solution of either placebo or 0.2 or 0.4% morphine in groups of n = 12, n = 15, and n = 16, respectively. Extent of healing was similar in the three groups. Severity of pain was minor pre-treatment and throughout the course of the study. Only minor adverse events were reported (dry mouth, burning sensation).

CONCLUSION

Morphine did not enhance wound healing compared to placebo-treated patients. Healing was observed in all groups, which may be attributed to an effect of glycerine or to the natural course of the disease. Patients experienced only mild levels of pain, rendering the model insensitive for assessing pain.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

OLP is a chronic disease and current treatment options are limited. Healing occurred in all three study groups, an effect we attribute to the carrier.

A novel lozenge containing bupivacaine as topical alleviation of oral mucositis pain in patients with head and neck cancer: a pilot study

Introduction: Oral mucositis induces severe oral pain in head and neck cancer patients. There is at this point no effective pain treatment without considerable side effects.

Objective: The aim of this pilot study was to investigate pain reduction in oral cavity and pharynx in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) with oral mucositis, the location of anesthetic effect, and duration of pain relief, after a single-dose administration of a 25 mg bupivacaine lozenge.

Methods: Ten patients with HNC suffering from oral mucositis pain were included. The patients assessed pain in the oral cavity and pharynx on a visual analogue scale (from 0 to 100 mm) at baseline and up to 3 hours after the lozenge was dissolved. Possible adverse events were registered.

Results: The baseline pain was 51 mm (range: 30–73 mm) in the oral cavity and 58 mm (range: 35–70 mm) in the pharynx. When the lozenge was dissolved, both oral (−27 mm; range: −3 to −52 mm; P = 0.0003) and pharynx pain (−20 mm; range: −3 to −45 mm; P = 0.008) were significantly reduced. After 180 minutes, the mean reduction in pain was significant in the oral cavity (−18 mm; range: −8 to −30 mm; P < 0.0001) but not in the pharynx (−8 mm; range: +4 to −23 mm; P = 0.12). No adverse events were observed.

Conclusion: The results indicate that the bupivacaine lozenge has a clinically significant and long-lasting pain-relieving effect on pain because of oral mucositis in patients with HNC.

Adipose mesenchymal stromal cells minimize and repair radiation-induced oral mucositis

BACKGROUND AIMS

Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) have been used to minimize and repair radiation-induced normal tissue injury in the intestine, salivary gland, liver, skin, lungs and cardiac muscle. This study investigated the ability of adipose tissue-derived MSCs (aMSCs) to minimize and/or repair single dose radiation-induced oral mucositis (RIOM).

METHODS

Syngenic phenotypically and functionally characterized BALB/c mouse aMSCs were implanted intraperitoneally in a RIOM mouse model with different dosing protocols. Response was quantified macroscopically, microscopically and by using different histological and clinically relevant parameters.

RESULTS

Irradiation at 18 Gy generated a self-resolved single-dose RIOM BALB/c mouse model with 5.6 ± 0.3 days mean duration (95% confidence interval (CI) 4.233-7.1 days) and 100% survival rate. Intraperitoneal implantation of 5 doses of 2.5 million freshly cultured syngenic aMSCs significantly and reproducibly reduced RIOM ulcer duration to 1.6 ± 0.3 days (95% CI 0.0233-3.1 days, a 72% reduction in RIOM ulcer duration), ulcer size and ulcer floor epithelial height. The therapeutic benefits were significantly dependent on dose size and frequency, number of doses, and therapy onset time. aMSCs therapy significantly minimized the RIOM-related weight loss, accelerated the weight gain and improved irradiated animals' hydration and nutritional status. aMSCs therapy did not potentiate head and neck cancer in vitro.

CONCLUSIONS

Syngenic freshly cultured aMSCs significantly minimized and repaired radiation-induced oral mucositis with a 72% reduction in ulcer duration. aMSCs dose size and frequency, number of doses and therapy onset time are the main keys for optimized therapeutic outcome. aMSCs therapy did not stimulate Head and Neck cancer cell growth in-vitro.

Peripherally applied opioids for postoperative pain: evidence of an analgesic effect? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Opioids applied peripherally at the site of surgery may produce postoperative analgesia with few side effects. We performed this systematic review to evaluate the analgesic effect of peripherally applied opioids for acute postoperative pain.

METHODS

We searched PubMed (1966 to June 2013), Embase (1980 to June 2013), and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 6). Randomized controlled trials investigating the postoperative analgesic effect of peripherally applied opioids vs. systemic opioids or placebo, measured by pain intensity scores, consumption of supplemental analgesics and time to first analgesic were included. Trials with sample sizes of fewer than 10 patients per treatment group or trials with opioids administered intra-articularly or as peripheral nerve blocks were excluded.

RESULTS

Data from 26 studies, including 1531 patients and 13 different surgical interventions were included. Clinical heterogeneity of the studies was substantial. Meta-analysis indicated statistically significant, but not clinically relevant, reductions in VAS score at 6-8 h (mean difference -4 mm, 95% CI: -6 to -2) and 12 h postoperatively (mean difference -5 mm, 95% CI: -7 to -3) for peripherally applied opioids vs. placebo and statistically significant increased time to first analgesic (mean difference 153 min, 95% CI: 41-265). When preoperative inflammation was reported (five studies), peripherally applied opioids significantly improved postoperative analgesia.

CONCLUSION

Evidence of a clinically relevant analgesic effect of peripherally applied opioids for acute postoperative pain is lacking. The analgesic effect of peripherally applied opioids may depend on the presence of preoperative inflammation.

Morphine mouthwash for the management of oral mucositis in patients with head and neck cancer

Background:

Oral mucositis is a debilitating side effect of cancer treatment for which there is not much successful treatments at yet. We evaluated the effectiveness of topical morphine compared with a routine mouthwash in managing cancer treatment-induced mucositis.

Materials and Methods:

Thirty head and neck cancer patients with severe mucositis (World Health Organization Grade III or IV) were randomized into the morphine and magic mouthwash groups. Patients received morphine sulfate 2% or magic solution (contained magnesium aluminum hydroxide, viscous lidocaine, and diphenhydramine), 10 ml for every 3 h, six times a day, for 6 days. Both groups received same dietary and oral hygiene instructions and care. Mucositis was graded at baseline and every 3 days after treatment. Patients’ satisfaction and drug effect maintenance were also evaluated.

Results:

Twenty-eight patients (mean age of 49.5 ± 13.2 years, 63.3% female) completed the trial; 15 in the morphine group and 13 in the magic group. There was a decrease in mucositis severity in both of the morphine (P < 0.001) and magic (P = 0.049) groups. However, at the 6^th day, more reduction was observed in mucositis severity in the morphine compared with magic group (P = 0.045). Drug effect maintenance was similar between the two groups, but patients in the morphine group were more satisfied by their treatments than those in the magic group (P = 0.008).

Conclusions:

Topical morphine is more effective and more satisfactory to patients than the magic mouthwash in reducing severity of cancer treatment-induced oral mucositis. More studies with larger sample size and longer follow-up are required in this regard.

Nebulized lidocaine alone or combined with fentanyl as a premedication to general anesthesia in spontaneously breathing pediatric patients undergoing rigid bronchoscopy

INTRODUCTION

Pediatric bronchoscopy is an intensely stimulating procedure that requires a deep level of anesthesia to prevent hemodynamic overstimulation and straining. Topical anesthesia of the airway may be a beneficial component of the anesthetic technique to achieve adequate depth without residual sedation. Experimental evidence suggests that in addition to its central effects, locally applied opioids elicit potent analgesic effects.

METHODS

Forty-five patients aged 1-6 years scheduled for rigid bronchoscopy for foreign body removal were selected and subjected preoperatively to a nebulizer setting according to its components patients were divided into three groups. Group A: Nebulized solution contains 4 mg·kg(-1) lidocaine 1%. Group B: Nebulized solution contains 4 mg·kg(-1) lidocaine 1% plus 2 μg·kg(-1) fentanyl. Group C: Nebulized solution contains 0.9% normal saline. Anesthesia was induced with 8% sevoflurane in 100% oxygen and maintained with continuous infusion of propofol 200 μg·kg(-1). Increments of 500 μg·kg(-1) propofol were given to the patient in case of straining or coughing. Patients were followed for the hemodynamics, the intraoperative difficulties, postoperative sedation score, time to full wakefulness and the postoperative complications.

RESULTS

The hemodynamic parameters were much more stable in the fentanyl group relative to the other two groups. Also, the incidence of intraoperative difficulties was less significantly evident among patients in the fentanyl group (As regards cough P(1) = 0.003, P(2) = 0.0001, As regards the need to manual ventilation P(1) = 0.037, P(2) = 0.001, As regards Propofol increments P(1) = 0.001, P(2) = 0.001 where P(1) refers to the fentanyl group relative to the lidocaine group, and P(2) refers to fentanyl group relative to the placebo group). The postoperative sedation score was significantly higher, and the time to full wakefulness was significantly prolonged among patients in the fentanyl group relative to the other groups (P = 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

It is concluded that preoperative nebulized fentanyl reduces the hemodynamic response to bronchoscopy and decreases the intraoperative coughing in response to surgical manipulation without significant side effects except prolonged time to full wakefulness of patients.

Topical morphine gel in the treatment of painful leg ulcers, a double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial: a pilot study

Chronic painful wounds, a major health problem, have a detrimental impact on the quality of life due to associated pain. Some clinical reports have suggested that local administration of morphine could be beneficial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the analgesic effect of topically applied morphine on chronic painful leg ulcers. Twenty-one patients were randomly assigned to receive either morphine or placebo in a randomised, placebo-controlled, crossover pilot study. Each patient was treated four times in total. Pain was measured by the visual analogue score (VAS) before application of gel, directly after and after 2, 6, 12 and 24 hours. Although an overall, clinically relevant, reduction of pain was observed upon treatment with morphine, the difference was not statistically significant. Morphine reduced pain scores more than placebo on treatment occasions 1 and 2. The difference was statistically significant only 2 hours after dressing on the first treatment occasion. Thus, our study did not demonstrate a consistent and globally significant difference in nociception in patients treated with morphine. However, the relatively small number of patients included in our study and other methodological limitations makes it difficult for us to draw general conclusions regarding efficacy of topically applied morphine as an effective treatment for some painful ulcers. Further studies are warranted to evaluate the value of topically applied morphine in the treatment of patients with chronic painful leg ulcers.

Interventions for treating oral mucositis for patients with cancer receiving treatment

BACKGROUND

Treatment of cancer is increasingly effective but associated with short and long term side effects. Oral side effects, including oral mucositis (mouth ulceration), remain a major source of illness despite the use of a variety of agents to treat them.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions for treating oral mucositis or its associated pain in patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy or both.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Electronic searches of Cochrane Oral Health Group and PaPaS Trials Registers (to 1 June 2010), CENTRAL via The Cochrane Library (to Issue 2, 2010), MEDLINE via OVID (1950 to 1 June 2010), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 1 June 2010), CINAHL via EBSCO (1980 to 1 June 2010), CANCERLIT via PubMed (1950 to 1 June 2010), OpenSIGLE (1980 to 1 June 2010) and LILACS via the Virtual Health Library (1980 to 1 June 2010) were undertaken. Reference lists from relevant articles were searched and the authors of eligible trials were contacted to identify trials and obtain additional information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials comparing agents prescribed to treat oral mucositis in people receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy or both. Outcomes were oral mucositis, time to heal mucositis, oral pain, duration of pain control, dysphagia, systemic infection, amount of analgesia, length of hospitalisation, cost and quality of life.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were independently extracted, in duplicate, by two review authors. Authors were contacted for details of randomisation, blindness and withdrawals. Risk of bias assessment was carried out on six domains. The Cochrane Collaboration statistical guidelines were followed and risk ratio (RR) values calculated using fixed-effect models (less than 3 trials in each meta-analysis).

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-two trials involving 1505 patients satisfied the inclusion criteria. Three comparisons for mucositis treatment including two or more trials were: benzydamine HCl versus placebo, sucralfate versus placebo and low level laser versus sham procedure. Only the low level laser showed a reduction in severe mucositis when compared with the sham procedure, RR 5.28 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.30 to 12.13).Only 3 comparisons included more than one trial for pain control: patient controlled analgesia (PCA) compared to the continuous infusion method, therapist versus control, cognitive behaviour therapy versus control. There was no evidence of a difference in mean pain score between PCA and continuous infusion, however, less opiate was used per hour for PCA, mean difference 0.65 mg/hour (95% CI 0.09 to 1.20), and the duration of pain was less 1.9 days (95% CI 0.3 to 3.5).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is weak and unreliable evidence that low level laser treatment reduces the severity of the mucositis. Less opiate is used for PCA versus continuous infusion. Further, well designed, placebo or no treatment controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of interventions investigated in this review and new interventions for treating mucositis are needed.