Ethnobotany and phytochemistry of plants used to treat musculoskeletal disorders among Skaw Karen, Thailand

CONTEXT

Musculoskeletal system disorders (MSD) are prevalent around the world affecting the health of people, especially farmers who work hard in the field. Karen farmers use many medicinal plants to treat MSD.

OBJECTIVE

This study collects traditional plant-based remedies used by the Skaw Karen to treat MSD and evaluates their active phytochemical compounds.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The ethnobotanical study was conducted in six Karen villages in Chiang Mai province using semi-structured interviews were of 120 informants. The data were analyzed using ethnobotanical indices including use values (UV), choice value (CV), and informant consensus factor (ICF). Consequently, the 20 most important species, according to the indices, were selected for phytochemical analysis using LC-MS/MS.

RESULTS

A total of 3731 use reports were obtained for 139 species used in MSD treatment. The most common ailments treated with those plants were muscular pain. A total of 172 high-potential active compounds for MSD treatment were identified. Most of them were flavonoids, terpenoids, alkaloids, and steroids. The prevalent phytochemical compounds related to treat MSD were 9-hydroxycalabaxanthone, dihydrovaltrate, morroniside, isoacteoside, lithocholic acid, pomiferin, cucurbitacin E, leonuriside A, liriodendrin, and physalin E. Sambucus javanica Reinw. ex Blume (Adoxaceae), Betula alnoides Buch.-Ham. ex D.Don (Betulaceae), Blumea balsamifera (L.) DC. (Asteraceae), Plantago major L. (Plantaginaceae) and Flacourtia jangomas (Lour.) Raeusch. (Salicaceae) all had high ethnobotanical index values and many active compounds.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

This study provides valuable information, demonstrating low-cost medicine plants that are locally available. It is a choice of treatment for people living in remote areas.

2022 Recommendations of the AFU Lithiasis Committee: Management of symptomatic urinary stones

The acute situation, caused by an obstructive stone, is defined by a renal colic that may be uncomplicated, complicated, or at risk in specific conditions. Its management may be medical or require interventional treatment by extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy, endoscopic removal, or ureteroscopy. METHODOLOGY: These recommendations were developed using two methods, the Clinical Practice Recommendations (CPR) and the ADAPTE method, in function of whether the question was considered in the European Association of Urology (EAU) recommendations (https://uroweb.org/guidelines/urolithiasis) [EAU Guidelines on urolithiasis. 2022] and whether they could be adapted to the French context.

Efficacy and safety of fixed-dose combination of drotaverine hydrochloride (80 mg) and paracetamol (500 mg) in amelioration of abdominal pain in acute infectious gastroenteritis: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIM

This randomized controlled trial was undertaken to assess efficacy and safety of fixed-dose combination of drotaverine hydrochloride (80 mg) and paracetamol (PCM) (500 mg). This was performed by comparison of mean pain intensity difference, total pain relief at 2 h, onset of pain relief, decrease in number of pain episodes, global improvement, and adverse effects.

METHODS

A randomized double-blind controlled trial for adults between 18 and 59 years of either gender with acute infectious diarrhea (≥ 3 unformed, watery, or soft stools with symptoms at least within the last 24 h preceding randomization with duration of illness not more than 72 h) with moderate-to-severe abdominal pain. Participants were treated with either a fixed-dose combination of oral drotaverine hydrochloride (80 mg) and PCM (500 mg) or oral PCM (500 mg) three times a day for 3 days.

RESULTS

Of 252 (126 in each group) participants, all received at least one dose of medication. Two hundred forty-two completed the study. Mean pain intensity difference at 60 min after administration of study medication by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and total pain relief at 2 h using both VAS and Verbal Rating Scale showed statistically significant improvement in drotaverine hydrochloride (80 mg) and PCM (500 mg) group. The onset of pain relief was also significantly better in drotaverine hydrochloride (80 mg) and PCM (500 mg) group when using VAS.

CONCLUSION

Fixed-dose combination of drotaverine hydrochloride (80 mg) and PCM (500 mg) is an effective and safe antispasmodic agent in abdominal pain associated with acute infectious gastroenteritis.

Sciatic nerve injury following analgesic drug injection in rats: A histopathological examination

OBJECTIVE:

Sciatic nerve neuropathy can be observed following intramuscular gluteal injections. The histopathological examination of sciatic nerve damage following intramuscular injection in the gluteal region for acute pain treatment is not feasible in humans due to the inability to dissect and examine the nerve tissue. To overcome this issue, we used a rat model for demonstrating damage to the sciatic nerve tissue after the application of commonly used drug injections.

METHODS:

We investigated possible damage following the intramuscular injection of diclofenac, lornoxicam, morphine, and pethidine in a rat model based on histopathological characteristics such as myelin degeneration, axon degeneration, epineurium degeneration, fibrosis, epineurium thickening, perineurium thickening, lymphocyte infiltration, vacuolization, and edema.

RESULTS:

All the analgesic drugs used in our study induced histopathological changes in the sciatic nerve. Anti-S100 positivity, showing nerve damage, was found to be the lowest in the group treated with diclofenac. Neurotoxic effects of diclofenac on the sciatic nerve were greater than those of the other drugs used in the study. Lornoxicam induced the least histopathological changes in the nerve.

CONCLUSION:

Diclofenac induced severe nerve damage not only after direct injection in the sciatic nerve but also after injection in the area around the nerve. Thus, we recommend restricting the use of intramuscular gluteal injections of diclofenac. Intramuscular use of morphine and pethidine should also be overviewed.

Evolving Guidance on Ureteric Calculi Management in the Acute Setting

Ureteric colic is a common presentation to acute emergency services. The gold standard test for the diagnosis of acute ureteric colic is a non-contrast computer tomography of the kidneys ureters and bladder (CT KUB). Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) should be used as first-line analgesia, with studies showing that there is no role for steroid or phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors. There is emerging evidence that a high body mass index (BMI) is a risk factor. The drugs used to facilitate stone passage are known as medical expulsive therapy (MET). The most evaluated being alpha-blockers. The Spontaneous Urinary Stone Passage Enabled by Drugs (SUSPEND) trial was designed to evaluate the use of MET (tamsulosin and nifedipine). This trial showed that there was no difference with MET and placebo for the spontaneous passage of ureteric stones. There is an emerging role for the use of primary ureteroscopy in the management of non-infective ureteric stones.

Efficacy and Safety of Drotaverine Hydrochloride in Children with Recurrent Abdominal Pain: A Randomized Placebo Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Drotaverine hydrochroride in children with recurrent abdominal pain.

DESIGN

Double blind, randomized placebo-controlled trial.

SETTING

Pediatric Gastroenterology clinic of a teaching hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

132 children (age 4-12 y) with recurrent abdominal pain (Apley Criteria) randomized to receivedrotaverine (n=66) or placebo (n=66) orally.

INTERVENTION

Children between 4-6 years of age received 10 mL syrup orally (20 mg drotaverine hydrochloride or placebo) thrice daily for 4 weeks while children >6 years of age received one tablet orally (40 mg drotaverine hydrochloride or placebo) thrice daily for 4 weeks.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary: Number of episodes of pain during 4 weeks of use of drug/placebo and number of pain-free days. Secondary: Number of school days missed during the study period, parental satisfaction (on a Likert scale), and occurrence of solicited adverse effects.

RESULTS

Reduction in number of episodes of abdominal pain [mean (SD) number of episodes 10.3 (14) vs 21.6 (32.4); P=0.01] and lesser school absence [mean (SD) number of school days missed 0.25 (0.85) vs 0.71 (1.59); P=0.05] was noticed in children receiving drotaverine in comparison to those who received placebo. The number of pain-free days, were comparable in two groups [17.4 (8.2) vs 15.6 (8.7); P=0.23]. Significant improvement in parental satisfaction score was noticed on Likert scale by estimation of mood, activity, alertness, comfort and fluid intake. Frequency of adverse events during follow-up period was comparable between children receiving drotaverine or placebo (46.9% vs 46.7%; P=0.98).

CONCLUSION

Drotaverine hydrochloride is an effective and safe pharmaceutical agent in the management of recurrent abdominal pain in children.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Efficacy and safety of parecoxib/phloroglucinol combination therapy versus parecoxib monotherapy for acute renal colic: a randomized, double-blind clinical trial

To investigate whether the addition of phloroglucinol to parecoxib could improve the efficacy in patients with acute renal colic. Patients of acute renal colic were randomly allocated to receive intravenous Parecoxib 40 mg plus placebo or Parecoxib 40 mg plus phloroglucinol 80 mg, respectively. Pain intensity was recorded using a visual analog scale (VAS) before drug administration and 5, 15, 30, 60, and 120 min after treatment start. The primary outcome was the mean pain intensity difference (PID) at each checkpoint and the effectiveness of drugs (≥ 50 % decrease in VAS score at the end checkpoint). The need for rescue analgesics and the incidence of adverse effects were considered as secondary outcome of the study. Among 236 patients enrolled in the study, 119 patients received intravenous parecoxib plus placebo and 114 patients received intravenous parecoxib plus phloroglucinol, the remaining 3 patients given up treatment. Baseline demographics were similar between two groups. There are significant differences in the PID at 15 and 30 min between two groups (P15 min = 0.011, P30 min = 0.013). Rescue analgesics were required by 17 patients (14.3 %) receiving parecoxib, 7 patients (6.1 %) receiving parecoxib plus phloroglucinol (P = 0.041). There were no differences in PID at other checkpoints between two groups, as well as in the incidence of adverse events and the drug effectiveness. Parecoxib in combination with phloroglucinol for acute renal colic has a faster action, also reduces the demand of rescue analgesics.

Management of Pain in the Emergency Department

Since pain is a primary impetus for patient presentation to the Emergency Department (ED), its treatment should be a priority for acute care providers. Historically, the ED has been marked by shortcomings in both the evaluation and amelioration of pain. Over the past decade, improvements in the science of pain assessment and management have combined to facilitate care improvements in the ED. The purpose of this review is to address selected topics within the realm of ED pain management. Commencing with general principles and definitions, the review continues with an assessment of areas of controversy and advancing knowledge in acute pain care. Some barriers to optimal pain care are discussed, and potential mechanisms to overcome these barriers are offered. While the review is not intended as a resource for specific pain conditions or drug information, selected agents and approaches are mentioned with respect to evolving evidence and areas for future research.