Cyclo-Oxygenase-2 Inhibitors

Injectable Ketorolac and Corticosteroid Use in Athletes: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

The use of injectable medications to help athletes quickly return to the field of play after injury is common. Understanding the effects and risks of these medications will help providers make informed decisions regarding their use in this patient population.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the utilization, efficacy, and adverse effects of injectable ketorolac and corticosteroids in athletes.

DATA SOURCES

This systematic review followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. A systematic search of the literature was performed using multiple databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov). Secondary references were appraised for relevant articles. No randomized controlled trials or other prospective studies were identified. Articles included retrospective database reviews and physician survey studies.

STUDY SELECTION

A total of 6 studies met the inclusion and exclusion criteria and were reviewed by 2 independent reviewers with a third consulted in the case of disagreement, which was not needed.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 5.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two reviewers recorded rate of use, effectiveness of treatment, and reported side effect data.

RESULTS

Most studies centered around the football athlete, either professional or collegiate. Professional football game day use of intramuscular ketorolac declined from 93.3% (28/30) in 2002 to 48% in 2016. Collegiate football game day use of intramuscular ketorolac declined from 62% in 2008 to 26% in 2016. Game day corticosteroid injection was far lower than ketorolac usage. Both medications were reported to be effective with few adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Use of injectable ketorolac is common but declining in professional and college football. Pain control efficacy is good, and risk of adverse events is low. The incidence of injectable corticosteroid use in athletes is unknown. Use of injectable corticosteroids in athletes allows for early return to sport activities with no reported complications.

Tendinopathy: Investigating the Intersection of Clinical and Animal Research to Identify Progress and Hurdles in the Field

Biological treatments, surgical interventions, and rehabilitation exercises have been successfully used to treat tendinopathy, but the development of effective treatments has been hindered by the lack of mechanistic data regarding the pathogenesis of the disease. While insightful, clinical studies are limited in their capacity to provide data regarding the pathogenesis of tendinopathies, emphasizing the value of animal models and cell culture studies to fill this essential gap in knowledge. Clinical pathological findings from imaging studies or histological analysis are not universal across patients with tendinopathy and have not been clearly associated with the onset of symptoms. There are several unresolved controversies, including the cellular changes that accompany the tendinopathic disease state and the role of inflammation. Additional research is needed to correlate the manifestations of the disease with its pathogenesis, with the goal of reaching a field-wide consensus on the pathology of the disease state. Such a consensus will allow standardized clinical practices to more effectively diagnose and treat tendinopathy.

The Collateral Ligament of the Digits of the Hand: Anatomy, Physiology, Biomechanics, Injury, and Treatment

Ligament injuries are among the most common musculoskeletal injuries seen in clinical practice and ligaments are the most frequently injured structures in a joint. Ligaments play an important role in balancing joint mobility and joint stability. Disruption of joint ligaments severely impairs joint function. Over the past 10 years, a new appreciation of a neuroanatomy and neurophysiology of joint ligaments and its biofeedback loops to surrounding muscles and tendons has emerged to explain the relationship between primary and secondary restraints that allow normal joint motion yet prevent pathological motion. This review focuses on this recent information with a view to new clinical approaches to these common problems.

Analgesics and Sport Performance: Beyond the Pain-Modulating Effects

Analgesics are used widely in sport to treat pain and inflammation associated with injury. However, there is growing evidence that some athletes might be taking these substances in an attempt to enhance performance. Although the pharmacologic action of analgesics and their use in treating pain with and without anti-inflammatory effect is well established, their effect on sport performance is debated. The aim of this review was to evaluate the evidence of whether analgesics are capable of enhancing exercise performance and, if so, to what extent. Paracetamol has been suggested to improve endurance and repeated sprint exercise performance by reducing the activation of higher brain structures involved in pain and cognitive/affective processing. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs affect both central and peripheral body systems, but investigation on their ergogenic effect on muscle strength development has provided equivocal results. The therapeutic use of glucocorticoids is indubitable, but clear evidence exists for a performance-enhancing effect after short-term oral administration. Based on the evidence presented in this review article, the ergogenic benefit of analgesics may warrant further consideration by regulatory bodies. In contrast to the aforementioned analgesics, there is a paucity of research on the use of opioids such as tramadol on sporting performance.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

A descriptive study of self-medication practices among Sri Lankan national level athletes

Background

Intake of medicines and supplements is widespread among the professional athletes in developed countries and there are reports to suggest inappropriate self-administration of medicine. Data from South Asia on this area is lacking. This study examined self-medication practices with regard to use of allopathic and herbal/traditional medicines among national -level Sri Lankan athletes.

Results

209 athletes from 15 national sport teams were assessed using an anonymous, interviewer administered questionnaire. Self-medication practices during the 3 months before data collection were evaluated. 60.8% athletes practiced self-medication. 58.3 and 9.4% consumed western and herbal/traditional medicines respectively, while a third used both. The most common symptom for which self-medication was practiced was musculoskeletal pain (73.2%). Oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and antibiotics were used by 15.7 and 7.1% respectively. Musculoskeletal pain was the predominant symptom that prompted the use of allopathic medicines, while the majority of athletes with upper respiratory tract symptoms being the predominant symptoms, consumed herbal/traditional medicines. Two different commercially available preparations of herbal mixtures were consumed by 15.7 and 15%. Pain prophylaxis during or prior to a sport event was reported by 20.1%, mainly with topical medicines. Medicines were obtained by direct request from a pharmacy without an authorized prescription by a majority (77.2%), followed by using an old prescription in 12.6%.

Conclusions

This study finds that self-medication with both allopathic and herbal/traditional preparations among athletes in a Sri Lanka is high. The use of oral NSAIDs without an authorized prescription in a significant number of athletes is a potential health risk. Frequency of oral NSAID use is lower than that is reported in non-Asian studies from developed countries. The use of herbal/traditional medications increases the likelihood of inadvertent doping. Enhancing awareness regarding risk of such practices among athletes, trainers, pharmacists and prescribers is essential.

Influence of a low-dose cox-2 inhibitor drug on exercise-induced inflammation, muscle damage and lipid peroxidation

The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of acute low-dose celecoxib administration on exercise-induced inflammation, muscle damage and lipid peroxidation. Twenty healthy untrained males (age: 25.5±4.5 yrs, weight: 72.7±7.9 kg, height: 177.3±7.2 cm) were randomly assigned to treatment (T) or placebo (P) groups. Blood samples were obtained before, immediately after, 3 h after and 24 h after exercise. Subjects ran for 30 min at 75% V.O₂ max on a treadmill. Participants consumed 100 mg celecoxib or a placebo immediately after and 12 h after the immediately post-exercise blood sample. Total leukocytes, neutrophils, creatine kinase (CK), C-reactive protein (CRP) and malondialdehyde (MDA) were assessed at each time point. Significant increases in total leukocytes and neutrophils were observed 3 h after exercise in both groups (P < 0.05). CK and CRP levels were significantly increased immediately, 3 h and 24 h after exercise in both groups (P < 0.05). A significant increase in MDA was observed immediately after exercise in both groups (P < 0.05); however, no significant group differences were observed for MDA or CK. These findings suggest that inhibition of cyclo-oxygenase activity with low-dose celecoxib does not affect exercise-induced inflammation, muscle damage, or lipid peroxidation.

Traumeel - an emerging option to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the management of acute musculoskeletal injuries

Musculoskeletal injuries are on the rise. First-line management of such injuries usually employs the RICE (rest, ice, compression, and elevation) approach to limit excessive inflammation. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are also commonly used to limit inflammation and to control pain. Traumeel^®, a preparation with bioregulatory effects is also used to treat the symptoms associated with acute musculoskeletal injuries, including pain and swelling. Traumeel is a fixed combination of biological and mineral extracts, which aims to apply stimuli to multiple targets to restore normal functioning of regulatory mechanisms. This paper presents the accumulating evidence of Traumeel’s action on the inflammatory process, and of its efficacy and tolerability in randomized trials, as well as observational and surveillance studies for the treatment of musculoskeletal injuries. Traumeel has shown comparable effectiveness to NSAIDs in terms of reducing symptoms of inflammation, accelerating recovery, and improving mobility, with a favorable safety profile. While continued research and development is ongoing to broaden the clinical evidence of Traumeel in acute musculoskeletal injury and to further establish its benefits, current information suggests that Traumeel may be considered as an anti-inflammatory agent that is at least as effective and appears to be better tolerated than NSAIDs.

Oral cyclo-oxygenase 2 inhibitors versus other oral analgesics for acute soft tissue injury: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Acute soft tissue injuries are common and carry significant societal costs. Cyclo-oxygenase 2 (COX-2) inhibitors (coxibs), non-selective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and other analgesics are used to treat acute soft tissue injuries, with ongoing debate about their analgesic efficacy, effects on tissue healing and adverse effects (AEs).

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the evidence comparing oral coxibs with other oral analgesics for acute soft tissue injuries, using the outcomes: pain, swelling, function and AEs.

METHODS

The following databases were searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, AMED, PEDro and SPORTDiscus. Further studies were sought through clinical trials registries, dissertations, correspondence with pharmaceutical companies and manual searches of relevant journals. There was no language restriction.

DEFINITIONS

'Coxibs' were defined as drugs that inhibit COX-2 >5-fold more than COX-1; 'acute' was defined as injury occurring within 48 hours of enrollment; 'soft tissue injury' was defined as closed injuries to upper or lower limb soft tissues (ligaments, muscles or tendons).

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials in humans comparing a coxib to a different class of oral analgesic agent for the treatment of acute soft tissue injuries for <30 days, and in which >or=80% of participants met the definition of acute soft tissue injury, were included. Studies were excluded if >20% of participants enrolled had back pain, cervical spine injury, repetitive strain injuries, delayed-onset muscle soreness, fractures, cartilage injury, penetrating wounds or primary inflammatory conditions (tendonitis, bursitis and arthritis). Nine out of 23 (39.1%) potentially relevant studies met the selection criteria.

DATA EXTRACTION

A standard form was used to extract data. Included studies were screened by the authors for risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and evidence was graded for quality using the GRADE tool.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Clinical heterogeneity was minimized by application of strict selection criteria. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic and meta-analysis was undertaken if appropriate. Weighted mean difference (WMD) was used to assess pain, relative risk (RR) to assess AEs, and Peto odds ratio (OR) to assess return to function.

RESULTS

The nine RCTs evaluated in the meta-analysis included 3060 patients. Coxibs were found to be equal to NSAIDs (day 7+, n = 1884, 100 mm visual analogue scale [VAS]), WMD = 0.18 mm (95% CI -1.76, 2.13), p = 0.85 and tramadol (day 7+, n = 706, 100 mm VAS), WMD = -6.6 mm (95% CI -9.63, -3.47) [single study, difference clinically insignificant] for treating pain after soft tissue injuries. Coxibs had fewer gastrointestinal AEs than NSAIDs, even with short-term use (RR 0.59 [95% CI 0.41, 0.85], p = 0.004) [low quality evidence]. Swelling was measured in two studies with no difference being found between groups, but the presentation of the data was not sufficient to allow further analysis. Coxibs were found to be unlikely to be different to NSAIDs in helping patients return to function (OR 1.0 [95% CI 0.77, 1.3], p = 0.99); however, a single study suggested they may improve time to return to function (moderate quality evidence) and may have fewer AEs than tramadol (very low quality evidence). The risk of serious AEs with both coxibs and NSAIDs in this setting was low (but incompletely defined).

CONCLUSIONS

More studies comparing coxibs with NSAIDs and other analgesics in the setting of acute soft tissue injuries are necessary. A different review methodology would be required to answer the question of cardiovascular risk associated with short-term use of coxibs and NSAIDs.

Prophylactic use of NSAIDs by athletes: a risk/benefit assessment

Athletes often seek artificial means to gain advantage and prolong participation when competing. This often involves taking naturally occurring or chemically synthesized compounds. The World Anti-Doping Agency does not prohibit the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) because these agents are not performance enhancing, and their analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects are at best performance enabling. Consequently, athletes have relatively unrestricted access to NSAIDs, which are readily available as over-the-counter drugs. However, concern has been raised on athletes' prophylactic use of these agents. Data from many sporting fields have consistently demonstrated that many individuals self-administer NSAIDs prior to athletic participation to prevent pain and inflammation before it occurs. However, scientific evidence for this approach is currently lacking, and athletes should be aware of the potential risks in using NSAIDs as a prophylactic agent. These agents are not benign, and can produce significant side effects, including gastrointestinal and cardiovascular conditions, as well as musculoskeletal and renal side effects. The latter side effects appear paradoxical to the rationale for prophylactic use of NSAIDs. This article discusses current observations regarding athlete use of NSAIDs, and the possible benefits and potential risks of their use.

The use and abuse of painkillers in international soccer: data from 6 FIFA tournaments for female and youth players

BACKGROUND

It is known that in professional men's soccer the consumption of prescription medication is high.

PURPOSE

The intake of medication in female and adolescent male soccer players has not yet been investigated.

STUDY DESIGN

Descriptive epidemiology study.

MATERIAL

Team physicians reported 10,456 uses of medication 72 hours before each match in 2488 soccer players participating in 6 international soccer tournaments.

RESULTS

The use of a total of 6577 medical substances was reported, leading to an average intake of 0.63 substances per player per match (under-17s, 0.51; under-20s, 0.51; women, 1.0; P < or = .001 [without contraceptive medication, 0.85; P < .001]). Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were the most commonly prescribed type of medication in all tournaments. Women's soccer had the highest percentage of players using nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs per match (under-17s, 17.3%; under-20s, 21.4%; women, 30.7%; P < or = .001). Relatively few players were taking beta(2)-agonists for the treatment of asthma (under-17s, 1.3%; under-20s, 1.3%; women, 4.3%; P < or = .001).

CONCLUSION

These findings highlight the existing problem of excessive medication use in international top-level women's and male youth soccer nearly to the same extent as in men's soccer. Further steps need to be taken to understand the rationale underlying the sports physicians' practice and to plan educational programs to avoid the abuse of prescription medication.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Continued abuse of medication may otherwise not only negatively influence the quality of the game but also the health status of the players.

Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs have opposing effects during stress fracture repair

Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were used to treat stress fracture. Bilateral stress fractures were induced in the ulnas of 48 adult rats. Animals were divided into two groups (NSAID and VEH), and treated 5 days per week with celecoxib (5 mg/kg) mixed in a vehicle solution of polyethylene glycol and saline (NSAID) or vehicle alone (VEH). One-to-three hours following drug administration, all animals were treated with unilateral active-LIPUS and contralateral inactive-LIPUS. Equal numbers of ulnas from each drug group were histologically evaluated at 2, 4, and 8 weeks following induction of stress fracture. Neither LIPUS nor NSAID influenced bone resorption, but each had significant and opposite effects on intracortical bone formation rate. These effects indicate that LIPUS may be used to facilitate stress fracture repair whereas NSAID may delay tissue level repair of stress fractures. There was no interaction between LIPUS and NSAID, indicating that the beneficial LIPUS effect was not mediated by the cyclooxygenase-2 pathway. LIPUS accelerated stress fracture healing, whereas the NSAID delayed repair. When used in combination, the beneficial LIPUS effect was not impaired by the detrimental NSAID effect.

The effects of the short-term administration of low therapeutic doses of anti-COX-2 agents on the healing of fractures

We have evaluated the effect of the short-term administration of low therapeutic doses of modern COX-2 inhibitors on the healing of fractures.

A total of 40 adult male New Zealand rabbits were divided into five groups. A mid-diaphyseal osteotomy of the right ulna was performed and either normal saline, prednisolone, indometacin, meloxicam or rofecoxib was administered for five days. Radiological, biomechanical and histomorphometric evaluation was performed at six weeks.

In the group in which the highly selective anti-COX-2 agent, rofecoxib, was used the incidence of radiologically-incomplete union was similar to that in the control group. All the biomechanical parameters were statistically significantly lower in both the prednisolone and indometacin (p = 0.01) and in the meloxicam (p = 0.04) groups compared with the control group. Only the fracture load values were found to be statistically significantly lower (p = 0.05) in the rofecoxib group. Histomorphometric parameters were adversely affected in all groups with the specimens of the rofecoxib group showing the least negative effect.

Our findings indicated that the short-term administration of low therapeutic doses of a highly selective COX-2 inhibitor had a minor negative effect on bone healing.

Dangerous exercise: lessons learned from dysregulated inflammatory responses to physical activity

Exercise elicits an immunological “danger” type of stress and inflammatory response that, on occasion, becomes dysregulated and detrimental to health. Examples include anaphylaxis, exercise-induced asthma, overuse syndromes, and exacerbation of intercurrent illnesses. In dangerous exercise, the normal balance between pro- and anti-inflammatory responses is upset. A possible pathophysiological mechanism is characterized by the concept of exercise modulation of previously activated leukocytes. In this model, circulating leukocytes are rendered more responsive than normal to the immune stimulus of exercise. For example, in the case of exercise anaphylaxis, food-sensitized immune cells may be relatively innocuous until they are redistributed during exercise from gut-associated circulatory depots, like the spleen, into the central circulation. In the case of asthma, the prior activation of leukocytes may be the result of genetic or environmental factors. In the case of overuse syndromes, the normally short-lived neutrophil may, because of acidosis and hypoxia, inhibit apoptosis and play a role in prolongation of inflammation rather than healing. Dangerous exercise demonstrates that the stress/inflammatory response caused by physical activity is robust and sufficiently powerful, perhaps, to alter subsequent responses. These longer term effects may occur through as yet unexplored mechanisms of immune “tolerance” and/or by a training-associated reduction in the innate immune response to brief exercise. A better understanding of sometimes failed homeostatic physiological systems can lead to new insights with significant implication for clinical translation.

Using recovery modalities between training sessions in elite athletes: does it help?

Achieving an appropriate balance between training and competition stresses and recovery is important in maximising the performance of athletes. A wide range of recovery modalities are now used as integral parts of the training programmes of elite athletes to help attain this balance. This review examined the evidence available as to the efficacy of these recovery modalities in enhancing between-training session recovery in elite athletes. Recovery modalities have largely been investigated with regard to their ability to enhance the rate of blood lactate removal following high-intensity exercise or to reduce the severity and duration of exercise-induced muscle injury and delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS). Neither of these reflects the circumstances of between-training session recovery in elite athletes. After high-intensity exercise, rest alone will return blood lactate to baseline levels well within the normal time period between the training sessions of athletes. The majority of studies examining exercise-induced muscle injury and DOMS have used untrained subjects undertaking large amounts of unfamiliar eccentric exercise. This model is unlikely to closely reflect the circumstances of elite athletes. Even without considering the above limitations, there is no substantial scientific evidence to support the use of the recovery modalities reviewed to enhance the between-training session recovery of elite athletes. Modalities reviewed were massage, active recovery, cryotherapy, contrast temperature water immersion therapy, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, compression garments, stretching, electromyostimulation and combination modalities. Experimental models designed to reflect the circumstances of elite athletes are needed to further investigate the efficacy of various recovery modalities for elite athletes. Other potentially important factors associated with recovery, such as the rate of post-exercise glycogen synthesis and the role of inflammation in the recovery and adaptation process, also need to be considered in this future assessment.

Pain after elective arthroscopy of the knee: a prospective, randomised, study comparing conventional NSAID to coxib

Although outpatient knee arthroscopy is probably by far the most frequently performed orthopaedic procedure, there are limited guidelines or consensus concerning the peroral postoperative pain management. A diversity of analgesics both in potency and action is prescribed. The purpose of the present investigation was to grade the pain and need for rescue medication during the first 4 days after the knee arthroscopy, comparing a conventional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) with a selective cox-II-inhibitor (coxib) as postoperative pain medication. One hundred and twenty-two patients scheduled for primary elective knee arthroscopy in general anaesthesia were randomised to either a NSAID (lornoxicam) or a selective cox-II-inhibitor (rofecoxib) postoperatively. Pain ratings and the need for rescue medication were followed for four consecutive days. Side effects were also registered. The need for rescue analgesics was highest the evening after surgery, when 42% of patients required one, or more, oral additional analgesics. The use of rescue medication decreased with time and 30, 25, 16 and 11% of the patients required additional analgesics for day 1 to 4, respectively, still 50% of all patients required at some point one or more rescue analgesics. Overall pain ratings were low, and showed similar pattern with evening and day, 50% of all patients required at some point one or more rescue analgesics. We found, however, no differences in pain ratings, or need for rescue analgesics between the two groups, conventional NSAID and coxib as well as no difference in side-effect profile. In conclusion, patients do require proper pain management also after minor outpatient surgical procedures such as knee arthroscopy. The traditional NSAIDs seem to be the first choice for analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects, when needed after elective arthroscopy of the knee.

Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound accelerates and a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug delays knee ligament healing

BACKGROUND

Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are used to treat ligament injuries; however, their individual and combined effects are not established.

HYPOTHESES

Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound accelerates ligament healing, a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug delays healing, and the nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug inhibits the beneficial effect of low-intensity pulsed ultrasound.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

Sixty adult rats underwent bilateral transection of their knee medial collateral ligaments. Animals were divided into 2 drug groups and treated 5 d/wk with celecoxib (5 mg/kg) mixed in a vehicle solution (NSAID group) or vehicle alone (VEH group). One to 3 hours after drug administration, all animals were treated with unilateral active low-intensity pulsed ultrasound and contralateral inactive low-intensity pulsed ultrasound. Equal numbers of animals from each drug group were mechanically tested at 2 weeks (n = 14/group), 4 weeks (n = 8/group), and 12 weeks (n = 8/group) after injury.

RESULTS

Ultrasound and drug intervention did not interact to influence ligament mechanical properties at any time point. After 2 weeks of intervention, ligaments treated with active low-intensity pulsed ultrasound were 34.2% stronger, 27.0% stiffer, and could absorb 54.4% more energy before failure than could ligaments treated with inactive low-intensity pulsed ultrasound, whereas ligaments from the NSAID group could absorb 33.3% less energy than could ligaments from the VEH group. There were no ultrasound or drug effects after 4 and 12 weeks of intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound accelerated but did not improve ligament healing, whereas the nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug delayed but did not impair healing. When used in combination, the beneficial low-intensity pulsed ultrasound effect was cancelled by the detrimental nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug effect.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound after ligament injury may facilitate earlier return to activity, whereas non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs may elevate early reinjury risk.