A randomised controlled trial of parecoxib, celecoxib and paracetamol as adjuncts to patient-controlled epidural analgesia after caesarean delivery

Comparison of different nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for cesarean section: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Cesarean section is associated with moderate to severe pain and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly employed. The optimal NSAID, however, has not been elucidated. In this network meta-analysis and systematic review, we compared the influence of control and individual NSAIDs on the indices of analgesia, side effects, and quality of recovery.

METHODS

CDSR, CINAHL, CRCT, Embase, LILACS, PubMed, and Web of Science were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing a specific NSAID to either control or another NSAID in elective or emergency cesarean section under general or neuraxial anesthesia. Network plots and league tables were constructed, and the quality of evidence was evaluated with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) analysis.

RESULTS

We included 47 trials. Cumulative intravenous morphine equivalent consumption at 24 h, the primary outcome, was examined in 1,228 patients and 18 trials, and control was found to be inferior to diclofenac, indomethacin, ketorolac, and tenoxicam (very low quality evidence owing to serious limitations, imprecision, and publication bias). Indomethacin was superior to celecoxib for pain score at rest at 8-12 h and celecoxib + parecoxib, diclofenac, and ketorolac for pain score on movement at 48 h. In regard to the need for and time to rescue analgesia COX-2 inhibitors such as celecoxib were inferior to other NSAIDs.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review suggests the presence of minimal differences among the NSAIDs studied. Nonselective NSAIDs may be more effective than selective NSAIDs, and some NSAIDs such as indomethacin might be preferable to other NSAIDs.

The Current Consideration, Approach, and Management in Postcesarean Delivery Pain Control: A Narrative Review

Optimal postoperative analgesia has a significant impact on patient recovery and outcomes after cesarean delivery. Multimodal analgesia is the core principle for cesarean delivery and pain management. For a standard analgesic regimen, the use of long-acting neuraxial opioids (e.g., morphine) and adjunct drugs, such as scheduled acetaminophen and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, is recommended unless contraindicated. Oral or intravenous opioids should be reserved for breakthrough pain. In addition to the aforementioned use of multimodal analgesia, preoperative evaluation is critical to individualize the analgesic regimen according to the patient requirements. Risk factors for severe postoperative pain or analgesia-related adverse effects will require modifications to the standard analgesic regimen (e.g., the use of ketamine, gabapentinoids, or regional anesthetic techniques). Further investigation is required to determine analgesic drugs or dose alterations based on preoperative predictions for patients at risk of severe pain. Outcomes beyond pain and analgesic use, such as functional recovery, should be determined to evaluate analgesic treatment protocols.

Perioperative intravenous acetaminophen and postcesarean pain control: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine the efficacy of perioperative (pre- or intraoperative) intravenous acetaminophen in improving postcesarean pain control in healthy women receiving regional anesthesia.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Ovid, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Scopus were searched from their inception to September 2019.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

A systematic review of the literature was performed to identify all randomized placebo-controlled trials examining the effect of perioperative intravenous acetaminophen on postcesarean pain control and other postoperative outcomes. Included trials examined women who were healthy and received regional anesthesia before cesarean delivery at term.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

The primary outcome was 24-hour postoperative pain scores with movement as measured by the individual studies. Secondary outcomes included intravenous morphine milligram equivalents used postoperatively. Meta-analysis was performed using the random effects model of DerSimonian and Laird, to produce summary treatment effects in terms of mean difference with 95% confidence interval.

RESULTS

Notably, 4 randomized placebo-controlled trials were identified that met the inclusion criteria with a total of 190 in the intervention arm vs 174 women in the control group. Patients in the intervention group received 1000 mg intravenous acetaminophen in 3 of the studies and 2000 mg intravenous acetaminophen in 1 study. All patients received regional anesthesia before surgery. The medication was given anywhere from 1 hour before surgery to intraoperatively immediately after delivery of the fetus. Pain scores 24 hours after surgery were only available in 1 study. The use of opioids as measured by morphine milligram equivalents after surgery was similar for patients receiving perioperative intravenous acetaminophen and those receiving placebo (38.7 vs 42.55; mean difference, -2.54; 95% confidence interval, -9.24 to 4.16). Only 1 study showed decreased postoperative pain scores when using perioperative intravenous acetaminophen, and this was limited to the first 4 hours after surgery. Importantly, these patients did not receive long-acting neuraxial opioids, which may account for the finding of improved pain control in the early postoperative period.

CONCLUSION

There are limited data available on the use of perioperative intravenous acetaminophen for cesarean delivery performed at term with regional anesthesia. The use of long-acting neuraxial opioids may make perioperative (pre- or intracesarean) intravenous acetaminophen unnecessary, whereas intravenous (or oral) acetaminophen may become more effective as neuraxial opioid analgesia wears off. More level-1 data are needed.

Strategies of analgesic treatment after cesarean delivery. Current state and new alternatives

The number of caesarean sections performed worldwide is increasing, and with it, the need for the optimal analgesia strategies. Deficient postoperative analgesia increases the need for opioids, delays recovery, and is associated with chronic pain and postpartum depression. It is essential to find good postoperative pain control strategies that facilitate early mobility, early recovery, and early hospital discharge with minimal side effects on the mother and infant. Multimodal analgesia based on neuroaxial anaesthesia with morphine in combination with non-opioids such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and paracetamol, gives the best post-caesarean analgesia outcome, and allows anaesthesiologists to reserve opioids, corticoids, gabapentin, magnesium or ketamine for situations where neuroaxial anaesthesia cannot be performed, for high-risk patients, or when pain is difficult to control. Peripheral nerve block techniques can also be added, such as transverse abdominis plane block, erector spinae block, or continuous wound infiltration.

Post-Caesarean analgesia in Timor-Leste, a low-middle-income country

Timor-Leste is a small, low-middle-income country in Southeast Asia. It is reported to spend less on healthcare than any other country. Hospital Nacional Guido Valadares performs 6 000 deliveries a year. Epidural analgesia, intrathecal opiates, transversus abdominis plane blocks, oral and intravenous opiates, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents have all been mooted as techniques useful in improving post-caesarean analgesia. Most of these options are unavailable in Timor-Leste. Opiate use in theatre is minimal and opiates are unavailable on the ward. Epidural anaesthesia and patient controlled analgesia are unavailable. A locally formulated post-caesarean pain management protocol, taking into account available agents and expertise, encourages spinal anaesthesia with hyperbaric bupivacaine followed by 100 mg intramuscular tramadol in the recovery area, followed by oral paracetamol 1 gm qid., tramadol 50 mg qid. and ibuprofen 400 mg tds. in the wards. This study sought to determine the efficacy of this protocol in a low resource environment.

Systemic adjunct analgesics for cesarean delivery: a narrative review

It is critical to adequately treat postoperative cesarean delivery pain. The use of parenteral or neuraxial opioids has been a mainstay, but opioids have side effects that can be troubling and the opioid crisis in the United States has highlighted the necessity to utilize analgesics other than opioids. Other analgesic options include neuraxial analgesics, nerve blocks such as the transversus abdominis plane block, and non-opioid parenteral and oral medications. The goal of this article is to review non-opioid systemic analgesic adjuncts following cesarean delivery, focusing on their efficacy and side effects as well as their impact on reduction of opioid requirements after surgery.

The Analgesic Efficacy of Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Agents (NSAIDs) in Patients Undergoing Cesarean Deliveries: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Postoperative pain after cesarean delivery, which accounts for approximately 1 in 3 live births in the United States, can be severe in many patients. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents (NSAIDs) are potent analgesics that are effective in the treatment of postoperative pain. In this meta-analysis, we assessed the analgesic efficacy of NSAIDs in postoperative cesarean delivery patients.

METHODS

An electronic literature search of the Library of Medicine's PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, Scopus, and EMBASE databases was conducted in May 2013 and updated in January 2015 (Appendix, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/AAP/A174). Searches were limited to randomized controlled trials. The primary outcome variable was visual analog scale or numerical rating scale pain scores. Secondary outcomes included cumulative postoperative opioid consumption and opioid-related adverse effects (drowsiness/sedation, nausea, and vomiting). Data extraction was performed independently by 2 reviewers. Extracted data were input into Review Manager.

RESULTS

Twenty-two randomized controlled trials compared a NSAID (n = 639) to a control (n = 674). Patients in the NSAID group versus control reported lower pain scores at 12 hours (P = 0.003) and at 24 hours (P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis showed a significant difference in pain scores at 24 hours, with patients receiving NSAIDs via intravenous/intramuscular (P < 0.001) route, but not the oral (P = 0.39) or rectal routes (P = 0.99). Significantly lower average pain scores were reported for pain with movement at 24 hours in the NSAID group (P = 0.001). Patients in the NSAID group versus controls consumed significantly less opioids (P < 0.001) and had significantly less drowsiness/sedation (P = 0.03), but there was no significant difference between the groups with regard to nausea or vomiting (P = 0.48 and P = 0.17, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The perioperative use of NSAIDs in cesarean delivery patients will result in a significantly lower pain scores, less opioid consumption, and less drowsiness/sedation but no difference in nausea or vomiting compared to those who did not receive NSAIDs. Further research should address the optimal NSAID regimen and examine the effect of improved analgesia on patient-centered outcomes such as patient satisfaction and quality of breastfeeding.

Preoperative cesarean delivery intravenous acetaminophen treatment for postoperative pain control: a randomized double-blinded placebo control trial

BACKGROUND

The United States currently has an opioid use disorder epidemic and research evaluating ways to minimize the use of opioids postsurgery are needed. One of these options is intravenous acetaminophen. If the use of preoperative intravenous acetaminophen was found to be effective for cesarean delivery, this would be beneficial for both the mother and breast-feeding neonate.

OBJECTIVE

The primary study objective was to see if maternal opioid use was significantly less in the postoperative period for the study group that received 1 g of intravenous acetaminophen preoperatively compared with a control group that received placebo. The secondary objectives were to evaluate maternal length of stay and pain scores postoperatively, and assess the acetaminophen level in cord blood at delivery.

STUDY DESIGN

This study was a prospective double-blinded randomized placebo-controlled trial. All pregnant patients who entered labor and delivery for a scheduled cesarean from November 2015 through April 2017 were eligible. Once consented, the medication was supplied by the pharmacy department, which performed the blinded randomization. Both the study drug of 1000 mg (1 g) of acetaminophen and placebo of normal saline were distributed as unmarked 100-mL bags administered over 15 minutes just prior to incision. No study personnel from the obstetric or anesthesia departments had any access to the randomization. Based on a power analysis using the published surgical data results, the goal was to obtain a minimum of 100 patients (50 patients in each arm). Primary data collection included demographics, number of opioid doses and morphine milligram equivalents administered to the patient postoperatively, length of stay postdelivery, pain scores, and newborn cord blood acetaminophen levels. Exclusions were maternal acetaminophen allergy, receipt of acetaminophen in the prior 24 hours, opioid use disorder, and hepatitis/liver impairment. Statistics involved χ², Fisher exact, and the Student t test where appropriate and a P value <.05 was considered significant with all tests considered against a 2-sided alternative hypothesis.

RESULTS

A total of 105 patients were evaluated with 51 who received intravenous acetaminophen and 54 who received placebo. The number of postoperative opioid medication doses administered to the study group was 11.1 (±8.9) compared with the number received by the control group of 10.5 (±8.5), P = .72. The morphine milligram equivalents in the study group was 94.2 (±40.4) compared with the control group of 90.7 (±42.1), P = .67. The length of stay and pain scores were not different between the groups. All of the umbilical cord blood values for acetaminophen were subtherapeutic.

CONCLUSION

These data demonstrate that for cesarean delivery, the use of a preoperative 1-g intravenous dose of acetaminophen does not decrease the number of opioid medication doses or the morphine milligram equivalents administered postoperatively, nor does it decrease length of stay postcesarean. The administration of 1-g intravenous acetaminophen preoperatively does not result in elevated newborn cord blood levels (ClinicalTrials.govNCT02694653).

Optimal Pain Management After Cesarean Delivery

Cesarean delivery rates are increasing worldwide, and effective postoperative pain management is a key priority of women undergoing cesarean delivery. Inadequate pain management in the acute postoperative period is associated with persistent pain, greater opioid use, delayed functional recovery, and increased postpartum depression. In addition to pain relief, optimal management of patients after cesarean delivery should address the goals of unrestricted maternal mobility, minimal maternal and neonatal side effects, rapid recovery to baseline functionality, and early discharge home. Multimodal analgesia should include neuraxial morphine in conjunction with nonopioid adjuncts, with additional oral or intravenous opioids reserved for severe breakthrough pain.

Efficacy of a single 40-mg intravenous dose of parecoxib for postoperative pain control after elective cesarean delivery: A double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial

AIM

The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of a single 40-mg intravenous (i.v.) dose of parecoxib as an adjunctive analgesia to intrathecal morphine after elective cesarean delivery (CD).

METHODS

A total of 82 low-risk term pregnant women who were scheduled for elective CD during the June 2014-June 2015 study period were enrolled. Two hours after surgery, subjects were randomly assigned to receive either i.v. injection of 2 mL (40 mg) parecoxib (study group; n = 41) or 2 mL normal saline solution (control group; n = 41). Patient randomization into groups was determined by the hospital's central computer system. Outcome measurements included total postoperative supplemental meperidine consumption, recorded pain score by numeric pain rating scale at 6, 12, 18, and 24 h, postoperatively, and patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

Patient characteristics and pregnancy outcomes were comparable between groups. Total postoperative meperidine consumption was not significantly different between groups (12.7 ± 18.8 mg vs 8.3 ± 16.7 mg; P > 0.05). Compared with control, the study group was significantly less likely to experience moderate to severe postoperative pain (score ≥ 4) at 6 h (0% vs 21.9%; P = 0.002). Study group patients reported higher satisfaction than control group patients (median score: 8 vs 6; P < 0.01). No patients in either group reported adverse effects from their assigned intervention.

CONCLUSION

Parecoxib did not demonstrate effectiveness in reducing patient requirement for supplementary meperidine after CD. However, administration of a single 40-mg dose of i.v. parecoxib after elective CD demonstrated effectiveness in reducing pain scores, with a resulting increase in patient satisfaction.

Single dose intravenous paracetamol or intravenous propacetamol for postoperative pain

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 10, 2011. Paracetamol (acetaminophen) is the most commonly prescribed analgesic for the treatment of acute pain. It may be administered orally, rectally, or intravenously. The efficacy and safety of intravenous (IV) formulations of paracetamol, IV paracetamol, and IV propacetamol (a prodrug that is metabolized to paracetamol), compared with placebo and other analgesics, is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of IV formulations of paracetamol for the treatment of postoperative pain in both adults and children.

SEARCH METHODS

We ran the search for the previous review in May 2010. For this update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2016, Issue 1), MEDLINE (May 2010 to 16 February 2016), EMBASE (May 2010 to 16 February 2016), LILACS (2010 to 2016), a clinical trials registry, and reference lists of reviews for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in any language and we retrieved articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized, double-blind, placebo- or active-controlled single dose clinical trials of IV paracetamol or IV propacetamol for acute postoperative pain in adults or children.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data, which included demographic variables, type of surgery, interventions, efficacy, and adverse events. We contacted study authors for additional information. We graded each included study for methodological quality by assessing risk of bias and employed the GRADE approach to assess the overall quality of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 75 studies (36 from the original review and 39 from our updated review) enrolling a total of 7200 participants.Among primary outcomes, 36% of participants receiving IV paracetamol/propacetamol experienced at least 50% pain relief over four hours compared with 16% of those receiving placebo (number needed to treat to benefit (NNT) = 5; 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.7 to 5.6, high quality evidence). The proportion of participants in IV paracetamol/propacetamol groups experiencing at least 50% pain relief diminished over six hours, as reflected in a higher NNT of 6 (4.6 to 7.1, moderate quality evidence). Mean pain intensity at four hours was similar when comparing IV paracetamol and placebo, but was seven points lower on a 0 to 100 visual analog scale (0 = no pain, 100 = worst pain imaginable, 95% CI -9 to -6, low quality evidence) in those receiving paracetamol at six hours.For secondary outcomes, participants receiving IV paracetamol/propacetamol required 26% less opioid over four hours and 16% less over six hours (moderate quality evidence) than those receiving placebo. However, this did not translate to a clinically meaningful reduction in opioid-induced adverse events.Meta-analysis of efficacy comparisons between IV paracetamol/propacetamol and active comparators (e.g., opioids or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) were either not statistically significant, not clinically significant, or both.Adverse events occurred at similar rates with IV paracetamol or IV propacetamol and placebo. However, pain on infusion occurred more frequently in those receiving IV propacetamol versus placebo (23% versus 1%). Meta-analysis did not demonstrate clinically meaningful differences between IV paracetamol/propacetamol and active comparators for any adverse event.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Since the last version of this review, we have found 39 new studies providing additional information. Most included studies evaluated adults only. We reanalyzed the data but the results did not substantially alter any of our previously published conclusions. This review provides high quality evidence that a single dose of either IV paracetamol or IV propacetamol provides around four hours of effective analgesia for about 36% of patients with acute postoperative pain. Low to very low quality evidence demonstrates that both formulations are associated with few adverse events, although patients receiving IV propacetamol have a higher incidence of pain on infusion than both placebo and IV paracetamol.

Oral analgesia for relieving post-caesarean pain

BACKGROUND

Oral analgesia is a convenient and widely used form of pain relief following caesarean section. It includes various medications used at different doses alone or in adjunction to other form of analgesia.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of oral analgesia for post-caesarean pain relief.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 July 2014) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Cluster-randomised trials were eligible for inclusion but none were identified. Quasi-randomised and cross-over trials were not eligible for inclusion.Interventions included oral medication given to women for post-caesarean pain relief compared with oral medication, or placebo/no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed for inclusion all the potential studies and independently assessed trial quality, extracted the data using the agreed data extraction form, and checked them for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

Eight small trials involving 962 women (out of 13 included trials) contributed data to the analysis, of which only four trials had low risk of bias.None of the included studies reported on 'adequate pain relief', which is one of this review's primary outcomes. 1. Opiod analgesics versus placeboBased on one trial involving 120 women, the effect of opioids versus placebo was not significant in relation to the need for additional pain relief (primary outcome) (risk ratio (RR) 0.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 1.92), and the effect in terms of adverse drug effects outcomes was also uncertain (RR 6.58, 95% CI 0.38 to 113.96).Low (75 mg) and high (150 mg) doses of tramadol had a similar effect on the need for additional pain relief (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.12 to 3.78 and RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.68, respectively, one study, 80 women). 2. Non-opioid analgesia versus placeboThe confidence interval for the lower requirement for additional analgesia (primary outcome) with the non-opioid analgesia group was wide and includes little or no effect (average RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.01, six studies, 584 women). However, we observed substantial heterogeneity due to the variety of non-opioid drugs used (I(2) = 85%). In a subgroup analysis of different drugs, only gabapentin use resulted in less need for additional pain relief (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.51, one trial, 126 women). There was no difference in need for additional pain relief with the use of celexocib, ibuprofen, ketoprofen, naproxen, paracetamol. Maternal drug effects were more common with the use of non-opioid analgesics (RR 11.12, 95% CI 2.13 to 58.22, two trials, 267 women).Gabapentin 300 mg (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.49, one study, 63 women) and 600 mg (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.71, one study, 63 women) as well as ketoprofen 100 mg (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.79, one study 72 women) were both more effective than placebo with respect to the need for additional pain relief. However, the 50 mg ketoprofen group and the placebo group did not differ in terms of the number of women requiring additional pain relief (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.07, one study, 72 women). 3. Combination analgesics versus placeboOur pooled analysis for the effect of combination analgesics on the need for additional pain relief was RR 0.70 (95% CI 0.35 to 1.40, three trials, 242 women, I(2) = 69%). When comparing different drugs within the combination oral analgesics versus placebo comparison we observed subgroup differences (P = 0.05; I² = 65.8%). One trial comparing paracetamol plus codeine versus placebo resulted in fewer women requiring additional pain relief (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.82, one trial, 65 women). However, there were no differences in the the number of women requiring additional pain relief when comparing paracetamol plus oxycodone versus placebo, or paracetamol plus propoxyphene (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.28, one trial, 96 women and RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.11 to 3.69, one trial, 81 women, respectively).Maternal drug effects were more common in combination analgesics group versus placebo (RR 13.18, 95% CI 2.86 to 60.68, three trials, 252 women). 4. Opioid analgesics versus non-opioid analgesicsThe confidence interval for the effect on additional pain relief between opioid and non-opioid drugs was very wide (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.07 to 3.51, one trial, 121 women). Side effects were more common with the use opioids versus non-opioids analgesics (RR 2.32, 95% CI 1.15 to 4.69, two trials 241 women). 5. Opioid analgesics versus combination analgesicsThere was no difference in need for additional pain relief in opioid analgesics versus combination analgesics based on one study involving 121 women comparing tramadol and paracetamol plus propoxyphene (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.07 to 3.51). Maternal adverse effects also did not differ between the two groups (RR 6.74, 95% CI 0.39 to 116.79). 6. Non-opioid versus combination analgesicsThe need for additional pain relief was greater in the group of women who received non-opoid analgesics (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.93, one trial, 192 women) compared with the group of women who received combination analgesics. Secondary outcomes not reported in the included studiesNo data were found on the following secondary outcomes: number of days in hospital post-operatively, re-hospitalisation due to incisional pain, fully breastfeeding on discharge, mixed feeding at discharge, incisional pain at six weeks after caesarean section, maternal post partum depression, effect (negative) on mother and baby interaction and cost of treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Eight trials with 962 women were included in the analysis, but only four trials were of high quality. All the trials were small. We carried out subgroup analysis for different drugs within the same group and for high versus low doses of the same drug. However, the relatively few studies (one to two trials) and numbers of women (40 to 136) limits the reliability of these subgroup analyses.Due to limited data available no conclusions can be made regarding the safest and the most effective form of oral analgesia for post-caesarean pain. Further studies are necessary.