Comparison of presurgical and immediate postsurgical ibuprofen on postoperative periodontal pain

Preemptive effects of etoricoxib, acetaminophen, nimesulide, and ibuprofen on postoperative pain management after single-implant surgery: A randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

There is insufficient evidence for pain control in preemptive analgesia (PA) after dental implant surgery, signaling the need for further studies. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of PA in single dental implant surgeries (SDIS), seeking to identify among the etoricoxib (ETOR), ibuprofen (IBU), nimesulide (NIME), and acetaminophen (ACETA)], which one has the higher efficacy effectiveness in relieving postoperative pain and reducing the use of rescue medication compared to placebo.

METHODS

In this triple-blind, parallel, randomized controlled clinical trial, 135 individuals with a mean age of 57.6 years (±11.7), both genders, were randomly divided into five groups according to the test drug: I-PLACEBO; II-IBU (600 mg); III-NIME (100 mg); IV-ACETA (750 mg); and V-ETOR (90 mg). The occurrence, duration, and intensity of pain were analyzed using the Chi-square, Fisher's exact and ANOVA tests, and the generalized estimating equation models, when appropriate.

RESULTS

Test drugs provided a reduction in postoperative pain scores and lower use of rescue medication when compared to placebo. The ETOR group presented significantly lower pain scores, when compared to other active treatments. The IBU group showed the highest mean number of rescue medication used.

CONCLUSIONS

All test drugs provided a beneficial preemptive effect demonstrated by the reduced postoperative pain and reduced use of rescue medication. The ETOR group presented lower pain scores, and the IBU group showed the highest mean number of rescue medication used among the test groups.

Effectiveness of Bromelain in the control of postoperative pain after periodontal surgery: A crossover randomized clinical trial

Background

This study aimed to compare the analgesic effects of Ibuprofen and bromelain after periodontal surgery.

Methods

A double-blinded crossover clinical trial was conducted on 22 patients needing two crown lengthening surgeries without bone surgery or with limited bone surgery on two quadrants of the maxilla, with control and test sides. Each quadrant was randomly assigned to bromelain (500 GUD) or ibuprofen (400 mg). Immediately after the surgery and 6 hours after it, the first dose of the drugs was packaged in the same capsules in A and B. Postoperative pain was evaluated during the first 8 hours and on the following day using a visual analog scale (VAS).

Results

Using the VAS, the Ibuprofen group showed significantly lower mean pain scores than the bromelain group at 4 hours (P=0.047). In contrast, there were no significant differences between the two groups at 2, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, and 48 hours (P>0.05).

Conclusion

The effectiveness of bromelain for pain control following periodontal surgery was comparable to that of Ibuprofen. Therefore, bromelain can be an efficient replacement for ibuprofen in managing pain after periodontal surgery, especially in patients with gastric ulceration and increased bleeding tendency.

Effect of preoperative ibuprofen on pain after lower third molar removal: A randomized controlled trial

Aim

The aim of the study is to predict the effect of preemptive analgesics in the third molar surgery and to analyze whether the number and frequency of postoperative analgesics are reduced following the administration of preemptive analgesics.

Materials and Methods

The present study was carried out on 50 patients who reported to the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery for removal of their impacted mandibular third molar. The patients were randomly divided into two groups of 25 patients each - Group A (test group) patients receiving ibuprofen (400 mg) half an hour before the surgery and placebo half an hour after surgery and the Group B (control group) patients receiving placebo half an hour before the surgery and ibuprofen (400 mg) half an hour after surgery. Both groups of patients will be instructed to avoid any drug but those prescribed (ibuprofen 400 mg SOS and rescue medication of tramadol 50 mg SOS) and not to seek any medical help elsewhere for postoperative problems. The pain was recorded using a visual analog scale.

Results

Demographic data in the study show females (8%) and male (92%) patients. The average time taken for surgery was more in the control group (58.36 min) as compared to the test group (55.64 min) with no statistically significant difference. Values of pain score, medication score, number of rescue medication, and frequency at different time intervals (at baseline, after 3 h, 6 h, 24 h, and 7 days) are expressed in terms of mean and standard deviation, respectively, and the result shows the statistically significant difference for pain score at baseline and 7th-day time interval only. The distribution of different types of impaction and different types of elevation/odontotomy shows a significant association in test and control groups.

Conclusion

Preoperative ibuprofen decreases the frequency and intensity of the pain. We believe that since this preoperative ibuprofen seems to be beneficial without any adverse effects, it may be used routinely in the 3rd molar surgeries and even in routine extraction.

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.

Preemptive effects of ibuprofen and nimesulide on postoperative pain control after open flap periodontal surgeries: A randomized placebo-controlled split-mouth clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Data on preemptive analgesia in periodontal surgeries are scarce and still diverse. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the analgesic effects of the preemptive administration of ibuprofen and nimesulide in open flap periodontal surgeries.

METHODS

The present randomized controlled clinical trial comprised 40 individuals, divided into two groups (n = 20), according to the test drug (ibuprofen and nimesulide) to be administered 1 hour preoperatively. Participants underwent bilateral periodontal surgeries at two different times, and were randomly given the test drug or placebo in a split-mouth design. Postoperative pain and rescue medication were evaluated at different times. Comparisons between ibuprofen and nimesulide were performed through a Generalized Estimation Equation model, using test drug and evaluation times, along with an interaction between these two variables as predictors.

RESULTS

In intergroup comparisons regarding pain control, ibuprofen showed better effects than placebo only at the first postoperative hour, whereas nimesulide showed better effects than placebo at 1, 6, 24, and 48 postoperative hours. In intergroup comparisons, nimesulide showed better effects than ibuprofen at 24, 48, and 72 postoperative hours, demonstrating a higher overall preemptive effect. No differences were observed in relation to the number of rescue medication.

CONCLUSION

Preemptive administration of nimesulide showed better overall preemptive effects on postoperative pain control when compared with ibuprofen.

Pharmacological management of pain after periodontal surgery: a systematic review with meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To assess and compare the pharmacological effect of different drugs on pain relief after periodontal surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Five databases were searched up to September 2019. The eligible studies comprised randomized clinical trials, involving only adult individuals that received any periodontal surgery and presenting two distinct groups of therapeutic regimens to control postoperative pain. Placebo groups could be included. The risk of bias was assessed with the RoB 2 Cochrane tool and the GRADE system. Meta-analyses were performed using different follow-up and drug comparisons.

RESULTS

Overall, 2398 studies were identified, of which 35 were included. Low risk of bias was determined for the majority of the studies. The meta-analyses showed that the comparison of dexamethasone or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) versus placebo favored the use of both interventions in a follow-up of 1 to 8 h for open flap procedures (OFP). However, no statistical difference was found for the comparison between NSAID and dexamethasone for OFP.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients may benefit from several pharmacological schemes for pain relief after periodontal surgeries. However, due to the high heterogeneity among studies, no fixed pharmacological protocol could be proposed.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

There is not enough evidence to recommend one therapeutic scheme. However, untreated pain is harmful to the patients and it is not advisable.

Comparative evaluation of analgesic and anti-inflammatory efficacy of ibuprofen and traumeel after periodontal flap surgery: A randomized triple-blind clinical trial

Background:

Pain management after performing flap surgery is of paramount importance. Taking into consideration the side effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and the advantages of homeopathic medication, the analgesic and anti-inflammatory properties of ibuprofen (NSAID) and traumeel (homeopathic AID) following flap surgery were evaluated.

Materials and Methods:

A randomized, triple-blinded, split-mouth clinical trial, with a sample size of 20 (age range of 20–60 years) was planned. Subjects included patients diagnosed with moderate chronic generalized periodontitis. Two quadrants for each subject were operated on, with an interval of 3 weeks. Random assignment of the operated quadrants to the following medication protocols was carried out by a third person: Ibuprofen, 600 mg and traumeel, 600 mg (up to three tablets) every 8 h for first 24 h and SOS (Si Opus Sit/if needed) thereafter for a period of 1 week as pain medication, respectively. After 1 week, sutures were removed. Primary outcomes were mean postoperative pain (modified visual analog scale) and number of tablets consumed in 1 week. The secondary outcome was postoperative tissue response. Any adverse effects were recorded.

Results:

Number of tablets consumed and pain perception was lower in traumeel compared to ibuprofen Group (P < 0.001). A better tissue response was shown by the group treated with traumeel as compared to the ibuprofen receiving group (P < 0.05). Three patients reported adverse drug reactions after consumption of ibuprofen.

Conclusion:

The present study suggested that while managing pain following flap surgery, traumeel was superior as compared to ibuprofen, with minimal or no side effects.

Effect of preemptive intravenous ibuprofen on postoperative edema and trismus in third molar tooth extraction: A randomized controlled study

Background

This study aimed to evaluate the anti-inflammatory efficacy of preemptive intravenous ibuprofen on inflammatory complications such as edema and trismus in patients undergoing impacted mandibular third molar surgery.

Methods

Sixty patients were included and divided into three groups (800 mg IV ibuprofen + 50 mg dexketoprofen, 800 mg IV ibuprofen, and control). In all patients, preoperative hemodynamic values were recorded before the infusions. The operation was started at 15-min post-infusion. Evaluation of edema size on the face and mouth opening (trismus) was conducted in the preoperative period, and at postoperative 48 h and 1 week.

Results

No difference was determined among the groups in trismus and edema size in postoperative measurements (P > 0.05). There was a difference between group 2 and group 3 only in measurement value of tragus-corner of the mouth on the postoperative day 2 (P < 0.05). A difference was found between the measurement values of trismus preoperatively and at preoperative day 2, and between postoperative day 2 and 1 week in group 3 based on time (P < 0.05). In group 3, edema on the face on postoperative day 2 increased significantly compared to that in the preoperative period (P < 0.001); in addition, edema increased significantly in groups 1 and 2 in the postoperative period but was less than that in group 3 (P < 0.001).

Conclusions

In this study, intravenous ibuprofen was determined to be more effective alone or in combination in alleviating trismus and to better limit the postoperative edema.

NSAIDs and bleeding in periodontal surgery

AIM

To evaluate and compare the clinical effects of ibuprofen and diclofenac sodium on bleeding during periodontal surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirteen medically healthy men and women of mean age 37.5±17.67 (mean age± standard deviation) were selected for the study. All the subjects were divided into three groups: control (C) and test groups (T1) and (T2). Each subject of T1 group and T2 group was given ibuprofen and diclofenac sodium respectively, prior to surgery. Bleeding times of patients were recorded prior to performance of periodontal flap surgical procedures.

RESULTS

It was found that there was increased bleeding time and increased peri-operative bleeding when ibuprofen and diclofenac sodium were taken prior to surgery and this was statistically significant. (2.5538 (T1), 1.8385 (T2) versus 1.2385 (C) minute, p= .001) (mean blood loss) and (62.0325 ± 9.0594 (T1), 51.082 ± 9.792 (T2) versus 37.4992 ± 5.99 (C) millilitre, p = .000).

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study suggested that pre-operative administration of ibuprofen and diclofenac sodium could increase bleeding time and peri - operative blood loss.

Comparison of preemptive analgesic effects of a single dose of nonopioid analgesics for pain management after ambulatory surgery: A prospective, randomized, single-blind studyin Turkish patients

BACKGROUND

Preemptive analgesia used for postsurgical pain management has been shown to reduce the requirements of postoperative analgesics.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the preemptive analgesic effects of diflunisal, naproxen sodium, meloxicam, acetaminophen, and rofecoxin (no longer available in some markets) in patients undergoing ambulatory dental surgery and the need for postoperative pain management in these patients.

METHODS

This prospective, randomized, single-blind study was conducted at the Departments of Anesthesiology and Reanimation and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Baskent University, Adana Teaching and Medical Research Center, Adana, Turkey. Turkish outpatients aged ≥ 16 years with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status 1 (ie, healthy) and scheduled to undergo surgical extraction of an impacted third molar were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned to receive diflunisal 500 mg, naproxen sodium 550 mg, meloxicam 7.5 mg, acetaminophen 500 mg, or rofecoxib 12.5 mg. All medications were administered orally 1 hour before surgery as preemptive analgesia and after surgery if needed, up to the maximum recommended dose. Surgery was performed with the patient under local anesthesia (articaine hydrochloride). Pain intensity was assessed using a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS) (0 = none to 100 = worst possible pain) at 2, 4, 6, and 12 hours after ambulatory surgery. The use of additional analgesics was recorded for 24 hours using patient diaries. Postoperative adverse events were recorded using the diaries.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty patients (108 women, 42 men; mean [SE] age, 26.8 [0.6] years; 30 patients per group) had data available for analysis. Demographic data were similar between the 5 groups. No significant differences in mean VAS scores were found between the 5 groups at any time point. All mean VAS scores indicated minor pain. The rate of additional postoperative analgesics required was significantly lower in the diflunisal group compared with groups receiving naproxen sodium, meloxicam, acetaminophen, and rofecoxib (3 [10%] patients vs 11 [37%], 15 [50%], 15 [50%], and 14 [47%] patients, respectively; all, P < 0.05). Bleeding at the surgical site was reported in 2 patients each in the diflunisal, naproxen sodium, meloxicam, and acetaminophen groups, and in 1 patient in the rofecoxib group; the between-group differences were not significant. No significant differences in the prevalences of other adverse effects (eg, nausea, vomiting, allergy, gastrointestinal symptoms) were found between the 5 treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In the present study in patients undergoing third molar extraction, adequate preemptive analgesia, based on VAS scores, was found with all of the nonopioid analgesic agents used. Fewer patients required rescue medication with diflunisal. All 5 study drugs were similarly well tolerated.

Effect of preoperative ibuprofen on pain and swelling after lower third molar removal: a randomized controlled trial

The aim of this study was to compare the analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects of preoperative and postoperative administration of ibuprofen after the surgical removal of impacted lower third molars. A triple-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial of 120 patients requiring the surgical removal of lower third molars was performed. The subjects were randomized into the experimental group (patients were administered 600 mg of ibuprofen (p.o.) 1h before the surgical procedure, followed by placebo just after the end of the operation) or into the control group (subjects received the same medication but the administration sequence was reversed). Pain was assessed using visual analogue scales, and consumption of rescue analgesic. The facial swelling and trismus were evaluated by measuring facial reference distances and maximum mouth opening. There were no significant differences between the two study groups regarding postoperative pain, rescue analgesics consumption, facial swelling and trismus. There was a slightly higher need for rescue analgesics in the experimental group. The preoperative intake of ibuprofen does not seem to reduce pain, facial swelling and trismus after impacted lower third molar removal when compared to the postoperative administration of the same drug.

Steroidal and non-steroidal cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor anti-inflammatory drugs as pre-emptive medication in patients undergoing periodontal surgery

The aim of the present study was to compare the pre-emptive use of a cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor with a well established steroidal anti-inflammatory drug for pain and edema relief following periodontal surgery for crown lengthening. Thirty patients requiring periodontal surgery were randomly assigned to receive one of the following medications: selective COX-2 inhibitor or steroidal anti-inflammatory drug, 60 min before the surgical procedure. To examine patient anxiety, a Corah's dental anxiety scale was applied before surgery. Using a visual analog scale, the extent of pain/discomfort during the trans-operative period and immediately after the surgery was measured. Additionally, intensity of pain/discomfort and edema were examined 4, 8, 12 and 24 h postoperatively. With regard to anxiety, no statistical differences between the groups were observed (p>0.05). With respect to the extent of pain/discomfort during the trans-operative, immediate and late postoperative period, data demonstrated no significant differences (p>0.05) between the COX-2 inhibitor and steroidal groups. With regard to edema, intragroup analysis did not reveal any statistically significant difference (p>0.05) during the 24 h following surgery in either group. In conclusion, both anti-inflammatory drugs presented a similar potential for pain and edema relief following periodontal surgery.

Novel p38α mitogen-activated protein kinase inhibitor shows analgesic efficacy in acute postsurgical dental pain

SCIO-469 is a selective p38α mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) inhibitor for preclinical models of acute pain. This prospective, double-blind, randomized clinical study compared efficacy and safety of oral SCIO-469, ibuprofen, and placebo in postsurgical dental pain. Subjects (n = 263) undergoing extraction of 1 or more impacted mandibular third molars received preoperative treatment with SCIO-469 (150, 210, or 300 mg), ibuprofen (400 mg), or placebo; the 210-mg group received 90 mg postoperatively. A 4-point categorical scale and a 100-mm visual analogue scale were used to measure pain intensity. The primary end point was median time from first incision to first rescue medication using the Kaplan-Meier product limit estimator. All SCIO-469 groups had significantly longer times to rescue medication compared with placebo; preoperative and postoperative treatment with 210 + 90 mg SCIO-469 resulted in 8.1 hours versus 4.1 hours to rescue for placebo (P = .003). Ibuprofen also increased time to rescue medication (6.6 hours) versus placebo (P = .04). Dizziness, headache, and nausea were the most frequently reported adverse events. This is the first clinical demonstration of antinociceptive effects in acute pain with preoperative administration of a p38α MAPK inhibitor.

Randomized double blind comparative study on the efficacy of Ibuprofen and aceclofenac in controlling post-operative sequelae after third molar surgery

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of Ibuprofen and Aceclofenac in controlling pain, swelling and trismus following removal of impacted mandibular third molar teeth. To assess the patient's acceptability of these drugs.

METHODS

The present double blind study was conducted on 60 adult patients for the surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars. Drugs administered were Ibuprofen and Aceclofenac. Both the drugs were packed separately and coded with equal in number. After removal of impacted mandibular third molars, following parameters were studied: (1) Analgesic activity, (2) Maximum mouth opening, (3) Swelling.

RESULTS

The scores were recorded preoperatively and on 1st, 3rd, 5th and 7th postoperative day.

CONCLUSION

Ibuprofen has a marginal edge over Aceclofenac. Both the drugs were well accepted by the patients with no reported adverse effects.

Postoperative analgesia in impacted third molar surgery: the role of preoperative diclofenac sodium, paracetamol and lornoxicam

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the postoperative analgesic effects of preoperative intravenous (i.v.) paracetamol, diclofenac sodium and lornoxicam (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs).

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Sixty patients with impacted third molar who underwent surgical removal were randomly allocated into three groups: group P (n = 20), group D (n = 20) and group L (n = 20). Group P received preoperatively 1 g paracetamol i.v., group D 75 mg diclofenac sodium i.m. and group L 8 mg lornoxicam i.v. Postoperative pain intensity, additional consumption of analgesics postoperatively and postoperative complications were compared among groups.

RESULTS

The groups were comparable for pain scores (p > 0.05). Maximum pain scores were recorded in postoperative 4th h in all groups (group L 22, 14-44 mm; group P 24, 13-43 mm; group D 14, 10-24 mm, p = 0.117). Patients experienced high satisfaction scores which were comparable among groups (group L 85, 75-100 mm; group P 87, 70-95 mm; group D 84, 77-98 mm, p = 0.457).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative intramuscular diclofenac, intravenous paracetamol and lornoxicam effectively decreased the pain scores. The patients were satisfied with the three postoperative pain management regimens.

The efficacy of acetaminophen-caffeine compared to Ibuprofen in the control of postoperative pain after periodontal surgery: a crossover pilot study

BACKGROUND

Previous studies showed that non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have significant benefits in the control of pain after periodontal surgery. Acetaminophen (centrally acting NSAID) is believed to provide less analgesic efficacy than ibuprofen (centrally and peripherally acting NSAID). This study compared an alternative combination of acetaminophen, 500 mg, with caffeine, 30 mg, to ibuprofen, 400 mg, in pain management after periodontal surgeries.

METHODS

A prospective, randomized, double-masked crossover clinical trial was conducted on 15 patients. Open flap debridement was performed on two quadrants with a 3-week interval in between. Each quadrant was randomly assigned to acetaminophen, 500 mg, with caffeine, 30 mg, or ibuprofen, 400 mg, immediately after surgery and 8 hours after the first dose. Postoperative pain was assessed during the first 8 hours and on the following day using the 101-point numeric rate scale (NRS-101) and the four-point verbal rating scale (VRS-4).

RESULTS

Using the NRS-101, the acetaminophen-caffeine group showed statistically significantly lower mean pain scores than the ibuprofen group at 1 and 2 hours (P = 0.002), whereas at 6, 7, and 8 hours, the ibuprofen group showed statistically significantly lower mean pain scores (P <0.001). Using the VRS-4, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups at all periods (P >0.05).

CONCLUSION

Acetaminophen, 500 mg, with caffeine, 30 mg, can be used efficiently in controlling postoperative pain after open flap debridement, especially in patients with gastric ulcers or bleeding tendency because acetaminophen is less hazardous than ibuprofen.

Citation classics in periodontology: a controlled study

AIM

The aims of this study were to identify the most cited articles in Periodontology published from January 1990 to March 2005; and to analyse the differences between citation Classics and less cited articles.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The search was carried out in four international periodontal journals: Journal of Periodontology, Journal of Clinical Periodontology, International Journal of Periodontics and Restorative Dentistry and Journal of Periodontal Research. The Classics, that are articles cited at least 100 times, were identified using the Science Citation Index database. From every issue of the journals that contained a Classic, another article was randomly selected and used as a Control.

RESULTS

Fifty-five Classics and 55 Controls were identified. Classic articles were longer, used more images, had more authors, and contained more self-references than Controls. Moreover Classics had on the average a bigger sample size, often dealt with etiopathogenesis and prognosis, but were rarely controlled or randomized studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Classic articles play an instructive role, but are often non-Controlled studies.

Clinical use of miniscrew implants as orthodontic anchorage: success rates and postoperative discomfort

INTRODUCTION

In this study, we evaluated the clinical usefulness of miniscrews as orthodontic anchorage. We examined their success rates, analyzed factors associated with their stability, and evaluated patients' postoperative pain and discomfort with a retrospective questionnaire.

METHODS

Seventy-five patients, 116 titanium screws of 2 types, and 38 miniplates were retrospectively examined. Each patient was given a questionnaire that included a visual analog scale to indicate discomfort after implantation.

RESULTS

The success rate for each type of implant was greater than 80%. The analysis of 79 miniscrews with a 1.3-mm diameter showed no significant correlations between success rate and these variables: age, sex, mandibular plane angle, anteroposterior jaw-base relationship, control of periodontitis, temporomandibular disorder symptoms, loading, and screw length. Most patients receiving titanium screws or miniplates with mucoperiosteal-flap surgery reported pain, but half of the patients receiving miniscrews without flap surgery did not report feeling pain at any time after placement. In addition, patients with miniscrews reported minimal discomfort due to swelling, speech difficulty, and difficulty in chewing.

CONCLUSIONS

Miniscrews placed without flap surgery have high success rates with less pain and discomfort after surgery than miniscrews placed with flap surgery or miniplates placed with either procedure.

The Use of Celecoxib and Dexamethasone for the Prevention and Control of Postoperative Pain After Periodontal Surgery

BACKGROUND

Conventional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs have been widely used in the control of postoperative pain, but sparse information is available on the efficacy of celecoxib, a selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor, or dexamethasone, a steroidal anti-inflammatory drug, after periodontal surgeries. The purpose of the present study was to compare the use of celecoxib and dexamethasone in the management of pain after mucoperiosteal flap surgery.

METHODS

A randomized double-masked cross-over clinical trial was conducted on 20 patients from 27 to 52 years old with generalized moderate to advanced chronic periodontitis. Mucoperiosteal flap surgeries for scaling and root planing were performed under local anesthesia on at least three quadrants, with a 4-week interval between. Each quadrant was randomly assigned to one of the following medication protocols: placebo, 4 mg dexamethasone 1 hour before surgery and 8 hours after the first dose, and 200 mg celecoxib 1 hour before surgery and 12 hours after the first dose. Postoperative pain was accessed during the first 8 hours and on the following 3 days using the visual analog scale (VAS), the 101-point numerical rate scale (NRS-101), and the four-point verbal rating scale (VRS-4).

RESULTS

Pain perception was statistically significantly lower in the celecoxib group than in the placebo group during the first 4 hours using VAS (P = 0.01) and at 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 7 hours using NRS-101 (P = 0.03). The level of pain was lower in the dexamethasone group than in the placebo only at the 3-hour period (P = 0.001). Statistically significant differences could be found among the groups at 1 hour (P = 0.015), 3 hours (P = 0.004), 4 hours (P = 0.02), and 7 hours (P = 0.05) using VRS-4. There was no statistically significant difference between the celecoxib and dexamethasone groups.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study suggest that the preemptive and postoperative use of celecoxib or dexamethasone were effective in the management of postoperative pain following open-flap debridement.

The effects on postoperative oral surgery pain by varying NSAID administration times: Comparison on effect of preemptive analgesia

OBJECTIVE

Many studies on the efficacy of preemptive analgesia have been processed in different ways. But the value of preemptive analgesia is still controversial. The goal of this study was to compare analgesic effects of a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) for oral surgical pain according to 3 different administration times.

STUDY DESIGN

Using a randomized, parallel-group, single-center, and active-controlled test design, this study was conducted with 80 healthy patients undergoing a surgical removal of an impacted mandibular third molar requiring bone removal. The oral NSAID was first administered 1 hour preoperatively, or 1 hour postoperatively, or no scheduled administration pre- or postsurgery. Whenever patients felt at least moderate pain (score > or =5 on a 10-point scale) after surgery, they were instructed to take the same drug. Pain intensities and times to the first and second onsets of postoperative pain from the end of surgery were assessed for 24 hours.

RESULTS

Of the 80 enrolled subjects in this study, 25 patients were assigned to the preemptive group, 26 to the posttreatment group, and 29 to the no-treatment group. The demographic distribution and duration of surgery in the 3 groups were statistically similar. The mean time to first onset of postoperative pain was significantly prolonged in the posttreatment group (277.2 minutes, P < .05) compared to the preemptive group (158.4 minutes) and the no-treatment group (196.5 minutes). The mean time to second onset of postoperative pain was not significantly different among the 3 groups. No significant statistical difference was found among the mean pain intensities at the first and second onsets of postoperative pain in the 3 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this small selected group of subjects and limited study design, the analgesic effects of NSAID administered preoperatively were no longer effective for postoperative pain. The results in this population imply that scheduled postoperative analgesics before pain development are adequate for postoperative analgesia without preoperative administration.

The efficacy of preemptive analgesia for acute postoperative pain management: a meta-analysis

Whether preemptive analgesic interventions are more effective than conventional regimens in managing acute postoperative pain remains controversial. We systematically searched for randomized controlled trials that specifically compared preoperative analgesic interventions with similar postoperative analgesic interventions via the same route. The retrieved reports were stratified according to five types of analgesic interventions: epidural analgesia, local anesthetic wound infiltration, systemic N-methyl-d-aspartic acid (NMDA) receptor antagonists, systemic nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and systemic opioids. The primary outcome measures analyzed were the pain intensity scores, supplemental analgesic consumption, and time to first analgesic consumption. Sixty-six studies with data from 3261 patients were analyzed. Data were combined by using a fixed-effect model, and the effect size index (ES) used was the standardized mean difference. When the data from all three outcome measures were combined, the ES was most pronounced for preemptive administration of epidural analgesia (ES, 0.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28-0.47), local anesthetic wound infiltration (ES, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.17-0.40), and NSAID administration (ES, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.27-0.48). Whereas preemptive epidural analgesia resulted in consistent improvements in all three outcome variables, preemptive local anesthetic wound infiltration and NSAID administration improved analgesic consumption and time to first rescue analgesic request, but not postoperative pain scores. The least proof of efficacy was found in the case of systemic NMDA antagonist (ES, 0.09; 95% CI, -0.03 to 0.22) and opioid (ES, -0.10; 95% CI, -0.26 to 0.07) administration, and the results remain equivocal.

Patients' experience of pain and discomfort during instrumentation in the diagnosis and non-surgical treatment of periodontitis

BACKGROUND

The present multicenter study aimed to survey the patients' experiences in relation to the diagnosis and non-surgical treatment of periodontitis according to current treatment routine.

METHODS

Patients (N = 268) treated for plaque-related periodontitis were enrolled in two groups: group 1 received primary probing of pocket depths (PD 1) and/or primary scaling and root planing (SRP 1); group 2 consisted of patients who were scheduled in the different centers for recall PD/scaling/subgingival instrumentation. Data collection included a full periodontal status, anesthesia employed, procedure time, and patient self-completed questionnaires to assess their previous and current experience of pain and discomfort during anesthesia and periodontal treatment.

RESULTS

Ninety percent of the patients received infiltration anesthesia during primary SRP, compared to only 2% during recall scaling/instrumentation and none during PD. Many patients (40% in SRP group 1 and 52% in the recall scaling/instrumentation group) were most bothered by the scaling procedure, while others (35% in the primary SRP patients) by the anesthetic injection. Painful experiences during previous primary PD and present SRP were highly correlated (r = 0.6).

CONCLUSIONS

From these results, it is evident that subgingival instrumentation causes pain and discomfort, an aspect that should be considered in periodontal therapy. Unfortunately, the use of local infiltration anesthesia to reduce pain is in itself a cause of discomfort. Attractive alternatives for anesthetic applications are much needed.

Preoperative nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents: review of the literature

Clinical studies that have used the third molar extraction model for acute post-operative dental pain have demonstrated the usefulness of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) as a preoperative analgesic. Despite this evidence, the use of preoperative analgesia is still not widespread. This article reviews the preoperative use of NSAIDs for reducing postoperative dental pain and includes recommendations to implement the use of NSAIDs in patients undergoing elective surgical interventions.

Efficacy of Ibuprofen-Hydrocodone for the Treatment of Postoperative Pain After Periodontal Surgery

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have shown that non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have significant benefits in the control of postoperative pain after periodontal or oral surgical procedures. The combination of a peripherally acting NSAID with a centrally acting opioid drug is found to be more effective. The purpose of this study was to compare an alternative combination of ibuprofen 400 mg with 5 mg of hydroxycodone to ibuprofen 400 mg used alone in the management of pain following periodontal surgery.

METHODS

This study used a double-masked cross-over design with the patients acting as their own controls. Twelve patients underwent two periodontal surgeries in different quadrants of the same dental arch at least 2 weeks apart. A standardized amount of local anesthetic and similar extent and duration of surgery for each side was required. The patients received four doses of medication at predetermined intervals and filled out a visual analog pain scale every 2 hours for the first 12 hours after surgery.

RESULTS

The overall pain reported by the patients on visual analog scale was 1.55 (SE +/- 0.16), out of a possible 10. More pain was reported with ibuprofen alone, 1.81 (SE +/- 0.12), compared to the ibuprofen with hydrocodone combination, 1.30 (SE +/- 0.16). The difference was statistically significant (P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

The findings suggest that a combination analgesic preparation of ibuprofen (400 mg) with hydrocodone (5 mg) results in better pain control compared to ibuprofen used alone.

What is the role of NSAIDs in pre-emptive analgesia?

NSAIDs inhibit the cyclo-oxygenase enzymes, and decrease peripheral and central prostaglandin production. In addition to reducing the inflammation that accompanies tissue injury, decreasing prostaglandin production attenuates the response of the peripheral and central components of the nervous system to noxious stimuli. Such a reduction in the response to pain can reduce the peripheral and central sensitisation induced by noxious stimuli, and reduce the pain experienced in response to subsequent noxious stimuli. These properties would seem to make NSAIDs ideal drugs to use in a pre-emptive fashion, where analgesics are administered prior to a noxious stimulus, such as surgery, with the expectation that reduction in peripheral and central sensitisation will lead to a decrease of pain.However, the available perioperative trials of pre-emptive NSAID use have yielded modest or equivocal results, and these may be due, in part, to controversy associated with the definition of pre-emptive analgesia and how to conduct the corresponding clinical trials. Although NSAIDs may have a limited ability by themselves to induce a pre-emptive analgesic effect, the available trials suggest how the perioperative use of these drugs may be made more effective. It is expected that NSAIDs will play an increasing role in multimodal analgesia and pain relief in general.

Pharmacology of systemic analgesics

Systemic administration of analgesic drugs is still the most widely used method for providing pain relief in acute painful situations. Opioids may be selected on the basis of their physicochemical characteristics and their diffusion index to the brain. But in clinical practice, their very steep concentration-analgesic effect relationship remains a critical aspect of opioid therapy. Thus, small fluctuations in plasma concentrations of opioids may lead to profound fluctuations in analgesic effect when their plasma and effect-site concentrations are near the minimum effective analgesic concentration (MEAC). Combining drugs acting on different mechanisms of nociceptive modulation offers benefits from additive/synergistic effects and will decrease the incidence of their adverse effects. Evidence-based reviews showed that effective pain relief using non-opioid analgesics relied on paracetamol supplemented with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). The role of COX-2 selective inhibitors (CSIs) in acute pain relief still requires further evaluation. NSAIDs, CSIs and paracetamol share the property of morphine sparing in situations of severe (post-operative) pain. CSIs may be beneficial in patients in whom post-operative bleeding is a major surgical risk as the effects of NSAIDs on coagulation may last for days. Finally, low-dose ketamine infusions remain a worthwhile addition to opioid therapy. Analgesic concentrations of ketamine are 1/5th to 1/10th the anaesthetic concentration and exert significant inhibition on N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptor activation.

Therapeutic uses of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in dentistry

The non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are among the most widely used classes of drugs for the management of acute and chronic pain in dentistry. Their therapeutic efficacy and toxicity are well-documented and provide evidence that NSAIDs generally provide an acceptable therapeutic ratio of pain relief with fewer adverse effects than the opioid-mild analgesic combination drugs that they have largely replaced for most dental applications. The great many studies done with the oral surgery model of acute pain indicate that a single dose of an NSAID is more effective than combinations of aspirin or acetaminophen plus an opioid, with fewer side-effects, thus making it preferable for ambulatory patients. The combination of an NSAID with an opioid generally results in marginal analgesic activity but with an increased incidence of side-effects, which limits its use to patients in whom the NSAID alone results in inadequate analgesia. The selective COX-2 inhibitors hold promise for clinical efficacy with less toxicity from chronic administration and may prove advantageous for the relief of chronic orofacial pain. The use of repeated doses of NSAIDs for chronic orofacial pain should be re-evaluated in light of a lack of documented efficacy and the potential for serious gastrointestinal and renal toxicity with repeated dosing.

Single-dose vicoprofen compared with acetaminophen with codeine and placebo in patients with acute postoperative pain after third molar extractions

PURPOSE

The purpose of this double-blind, randomized study was to compare the efficacy and safety of a single dose of the following medications: 2 tablets of Vicoprofen (ibuprofen 200 mg/hydrocodone 7.5 mg; Knoll Pharmaceutical Co, Mount Olive, NJ), 2 tablets ofp6 acetaminophen with codeine phosphate (acetaminophen 300 mg/codeine 30 mg), and 2 tablets of placebo in the management of moderate to severe postoperative dental pain after surgical extraction of at least one impacted mandibular third molar.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

One hundred twenty-five patients (75 women, 50 men) participated in the study. The time of first perceptible pain relief and meaningful pain relief were measured using a stopwatch technique. Pain intensity and pain relief scores were recorded using standard verbal descriptors at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 hours after dosing. At the conclusion of the study, patients completed a global evaluation for the effectiveness of the study medication.

RESULTS

Both active treatments were superior to placebo for all analgesic measures. Pain relief scores were significantly better for Vicoprofen than placebo throughout the study and significantly better than for acetaminophen with codeine from 2 through 8 hours after dosing. The duration of analgesia (time to remedication) was significantly longer for Vicoprofen (median, 5.50 hours) compared with acetaminophen with codeine (median, 3.03 hours) and placebo (median, 1.00 hours). Mean global evaluation for Vicoprofen was significantly better than for placebo and acetaminophen with codeine. Overall, there were no significant differences in the adverse event profile among the 3 treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Vicoprofen was found to be an effective postoperative analgesic medication in the management of acute postoperative dental pain. Its total analgesic effect, duration of analgesia, and global evaluation were superior to acetaminophen with codeine and placebo in this study model.

Single dose oral ibuprofen and diclofenac for postoperative pain

BACKGROUND

Ibuprofen and diclofenac are two widely used non-steroidal anti-inflammatory (NSAID) analgesics. It is therefore important to know which drug should be recommended for postoperative pain relief. This review seeks to compare the relative efficacy of the two drugs, and also considers the issues of safety and cost.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy of ibuprofen and diclofenac in single oral doses for moderate to severe postoperative pain.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Randomised trials were identified by searching Medline (1966 to December 1996), Embase (1980 to January 1997), the Cochrane Library (Issue 3 1996), Biological Abstracts (January 1985 to December 1996) and the Oxford Pain Relief Database (1950 to 1994). Date of the most recent searches: July 1998.

SELECTION CRITERIA

The inclusion criteria used were: full journal publication, postoperative pain, postoperative oral administration, adult patients, baseline pain of moderate to severe intensity, double-blind design, and random allocation to treatment groups which compared either ibuprofen or diclofenac with placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted by two independent reviewers, and trials were quality scored. Summed pain relief or pain intensity difference over four to six hours was extracted, and converted into dichotomous information yielding the number of patients with at least 50% pain relief. This was then used to calculate the relative benefit and the number-needed-to-treat (NNT) for one patient to achieve at least 50% pain relief.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-four trials compared ibuprofen and placebo (3,591 patients), six compared diclofenac with placebo (840 patients) and there were two direct comparisons of diclofenac 50 mg and ibuprofen 400 mg (130 patients). In postoperative pain the NNTs for ibuprofen 200 mg were 3.3 (95% confidence interval 2.8 to 4.0) compared with placebo, for ibuprofen 400 mg 2.7 (2.5 to 3.0), for ibuprofen 600 mg 2.4 (1.9 to 3.3), for diclofenac 50 mg 2.3 (2.0 to 2.7) and for diclofenac 100 mg 1.8 (1.5 to 2.1). Direct comparisons of diclofenac 50 mg with ibuprofen 400 mg showed no significant difference between the two.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Both drugs work well. Choosing between them is an issue of dose, safety and cost.

[Prevention of postoperative pain]

The pre-emptive analgesia concept suggests that pre-administration of analgesics may enhance the efficacy of these drugs. This review has selected the data from the literature according to two types of methodological criteria: Sackett's criteria, and those specific of pre-emptive analgesia studies. Infiltration, spinal and peripheral nerve blocks using local anaesthetic drugs do not seem to produce pre-emptive analgesia. The few positive results have limited clinical significance. The results concerning opioids are contradictory and the clinical significance is limited. Preoperative oral administration of non steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) offers no benefit. Intravenous pre-administration has a limited advantage, but enhances perioperative bleeding. Ketamine, an NMDA receptor antagonist, may have some pre-emptive analgesic properties according to the few studies available. In conclusion, pre-administration of analgesic drugs represents the usual strategy for the anaesthesiologist (spinal or peripheral block, infiltration, opioids). In other cases (NSAIDs, ketamine), pre-administration represents a change in usual practice. This is not justified for NSAIDs; NMDA receptor antagonists may offer an interesting research area. Data concerning pre-emptive analgesia for chronic pain syndrome such as phantom limb pain are quite limited.

The analgesic efficacy of ibuprofen in periodontal surgery: A multicentre study

The efficacy of a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agent, ibuprofen, was evaluated in pain control following periodontal surgery. This type of agent acts peripherally by inhibiting the release of prostaglandins and minimizing the local inflammatory response. Thus there may be an advantage in pre-treatment administration of the drug so as to delay or even prevent postoperative pain. The study was multicentre, involving a Public Hospital Periodontal Unit, two specialist periodontal practices in Sydney, NSW, and two in Canberra, ACT. One hundred and twenty-seven patients who were to undergo periodontal surgery were randomly given either two 200 mg tablets of ibuprofen or two matching placebo tablets at least 30 minutes before administration of local anaesthesia. The procedure was double blind: neither the patient nor the clinician was aware of the tablet identity. Postoperatively, all patients were given labelled ibuprofen for pain relief, but were randomly divided into two groups: As directed who were instructed to take the drug regularly for two days postoperatively, and As required, who were to take the drug only if needed for pain relief. All patients completed a diary recording quantity and time of medication, and regular assessment of pain experience utilizing a visual analogue scale. The As directed group showed no significant difference in pain experience between pre-operative and post-operative only medication, but the As required group experienced significantly less pain and requirement for medication if the ibuprofen was administered pre-operatively.

Effect of a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug on tissue levels of immunoreactive prostaglandin E2, immunoreactive leukotriene, and pain after periodontal surgery

The aim of this study was to measure tissue levels of immunoreactive prostaglandin E2 (iPGE2), immunoreactive leukotriene B4 (iLTB4), and pain after periodontal surgery and to evaluate the effect of the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID), ibuprofen, on these levels. Two contralateral quadrants in each of nine patients were selected to undergo separate surgical procedures, one with ibuprofen (800 mg 1 hour presurgery and 400 mg postsurgery) and one with a placebo. Intra-operatively, a custom-made microdialysis probe, with a 3,000 dalton molecular weight cut-off, was inserted beneath the soft tissue flap and a dialysate collected every 20 minutes for 4 hours after surgery. Pain perception was measured at the same time intervals using two pain scales. Dialysate samples were assayed using two enzyme immunoassays. Mean tissue levels of iPGE2 in the placebo group increased from 74 nM at 40 minutes to a peak of 261 nM at 200 minutes. Mean tissue levels of iLTB4 in the placebo group fluctuated between 0.2 and 0.6 nM. Pain levels in this group increased continuously with time, peaking at 4 hours. Mean tissue levels of iPGE2 in the ibuprofen group were significantly suppressed, exhibiting more than a 95% reduction. This was accompanied by a significant reduction in pain. Ibuprofen had no detectable effect on tissue levels of iLTB4. These data indicate that iPGE2 and iLTB4 are present at relatively high concentrations in the periodontal tissues after surgery. Since these concentrations exceed the Kd values for binding to their respective receptors, PGE2 and LTB4 may be associated with the development of postsurgical pain and inflammation. These data also indicate that ibuprofen can successfully inhibit iPGE2 production in the periodontal tissues and in this way may help reduce postoperative pain and inflammation.

Preoperative ketorolac administration has no preemptive analgesic effect for minor orthopaedic surgery

The utility of preoperative ketorolac administration to reduce the intensity and duration of postoperative pain was compared with placebo in a randomized double-blind design of 60 ASA 1-2 patients scheduled for minor orthopaedic surgery. No opioids nor local anaesthetic blocks were used during surgery. The patients received either 30 mg ketorolac IV before surgery followed by a placebo injection after surgery or the reverse. Postoperative pain intensity was assessed repeatedly for 6 h using a visual analogue scale. No differences in pain intensity were observed between the two groups except for the initial 15-min postoperative assessments in the ketorolac group. The time to first rescue morphine administration and the total morphine consumption during the 6-h observation period were similar. It is concluded that the preoperative administration of ketorolac did not provide a significant preemptive analgesic benefit with regard to postoperative pain relief and opioid dose-sparing effect.

Effect of pretreatment with ketorolac tromethamine on post-operative pain following periodontal surgery

A double-blind, randomized, single-dose clinical trial to evaluate the analgesic efficacy of preoperative ketorolac tromethamine administration on periodontal postoperative pain was designed. One group received 20 mg ketorolac immediately before periodontal flap surgery, and the other group received placebo. Naproxen sodium was allowed postoperatively as rescue medication. The visual analog scale was used to estimate pain. Postoperative pain was assessed hourly for the first 10 h on the day of surgery, and 4 x daily on the 1st and 2nd postsurgical days. Timing and dose of rescue analgesic remedication were also recorded. Results indicated that preoperative treatment with ketorolac significantly reduced initial pain intensity and delayed the onset of postoperative pain as compared to placebo. Incidence and amount of naproxen consumption was similarly small in both ketorolac- and placebo-treated groups. No adverse reactions related to preoperative medication were observed.