METHODS: One hundred thirteen patients who met International Headache Society criteria for migraine and who did not experience satisfactory response to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, received open-label treatment with a 40-mg dose of eletriptan for one migraine attack. Efficacy assessments were made at 1, 2, 4, and 24 hours postdose and consisted of headache and pain-free response rates, absence of associated symptoms, and functional response. Global ratings of treatment effectiveness and preference were obtained at 24 hours.

RESULTS: The pain-free response rate at 2 hours postdose was 25% and at 4 hours postdose, 55%; the headache response rate at 2 hours was 66% and at 4 hours, 87%. At 2 hours postdose, relief of baseline associated symptoms was achieved by 41% of patients with nausea compared to 82% of patients at 4 hours; for patients with phonophobia, 67% were relieved at 2 hours and 93% at 4 hours, and for patients with photophobia, 70% were relieved at 2 hours and 91% at 4 hours. Functional response was achieved by 70% of patients by 2 hours postdose. The high level of acute response was maintained over 24 hours, with only 24% of patients experiencing a headache recurrence and only 10% using rescue medication. At 24 hours postdose, 74% of patients rated eletriptan as preferable to any previous treatment for migraine. The most frequent reasons cited for this treatment preference were faster headache improvement (83%) and functional response (78%). Overall, eletriptan was well tolerated; most adverse events were transient and mild to moderate in severity. No serious adverse events were reported.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that have assessed strategies for treatment and prevention of heavy menstrual bleeding or pain associated with IUD use, for example, pharmacotherapy and alternative therapies.

SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL to January 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs in any language that tested strategies for treatment or prevention of heavy menstrual bleeding or pain associated with IUD (Cu IUD, LNG IUD or other IUD) use. The comparison could be no intervention, placebo or another active intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, and extracted data. Primary outcomes were volume of menstrual blood loss, duration of menstruation and painful menstruation. We used a random-effects model in all meta-analyses. Review authors assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS: This review includes 21 trials involving 3689 participants from middle- and high-income countries. Women were 18 to 45 years old and either already using an IUD or had just had one placed for contraception. The included trials examined NSAIDs and other interventions. Eleven were treatment trials, of these seven were on users of the Cu IUD, one on LNG IUD and three on an unknown type. Ten were prevention trials, six focused on Cu IUD users, and four on LNG IUD users. Sixteen trials had high risk of detection bias due to subjective assessment of pain and bleeding. Treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding Cu IUD Vitamin B1 resulted in fewer pads used per day (mean difference (MD) -7.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) -8.50 to -5.50) and fewer bleeding days (MD -2.00, 95% CI -2.38 to -1.62; 1 trial; 110 women; low-certainty evidence) compared to placebo. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of naproxen on the volume of menstruation compared to placebo (odds ratio (OR) 0.09, 95% CI 0.00 to 1.78; 1 trial, 40 women; very low-certainty evidence). Treatment with mefenamic acid resulted in less volume of blood loss compared to tranexamic acid (MD -64.26, 95% CI -105.65 to -22.87; 1 trial, 94 women; low-certainty evidence). However, there was no difference in duration of bleeding with treatment of mefenamic acid or tranexamic acid (MD 0.08 days, 95% CI -0.27 to 0.42, 2 trials, 152 women; low-certainty evidence). LNG IUD The use of ulipristal acetate in LNG IUD may not reduce the number of bleeding days in 90 days in comparison to placebo (MD -9.30 days, 95% CI -26.76 to 8.16; 1 trial, 24 women; low-certainty evidence). Unknown IUD type Mefenamic acid may not reduce volume of bleeding compared to Vitex agnus measured by pictorial blood assessment chart (MD -2.40, 95% CI -13.77 to 8.97; 1 trial; 84 women; low-certainty evidence). Treatment of pain Cu IUD Treatment with tranexamic acid and sodium diclofenac may result in little or no difference in the occurrence of pain (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.06 to 17.25; 1 trial, 38 women; very low-certainty evidence). Unknown IUD type Naproxen may reduce pain (MD 4.10, 95% CI 0.91 to 7.29; 1 trial, 33 women; low-certainty evidence). Prevention of heavy menstrual bleeding Cu IUD We found very low-certainty evidence that tolfenamic acid may prevent heavy bleeding compared to placebo (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.85; 1 trial, 310 women). There was no difference between ibuprofen and placebo in blood volume reduction (MD -14.11, 95% CI -36.04 to 7.82) and duration of bleeding (MD -0.2 days, 95% CI -1.40 to 1.0; 1 trial, 28 women, low-certainty evidence). Aspirin may not prevent heavy bleeding in comparison to paracetamol (MD -0.30, 95% CI -26.16 to 25.56; 1 trial, 20 women; very low-certainty evidence). LNG IUD Ulipristal acetate may increase the percentage of bleeding days compared to placebo (MD 9.50, 95% CI 1.48 to 17.52; 1 trial, 118 women; low-certainty evidence). There were insufficient data for analysis in a single trial comparing mifepristone and vitamin B. There were insufficient data for analysis in the single trial comparing tranexamic acid and mefenamic acid and in another trial comparing naproxen with estradiol. Prevention of pain Cu IUD There was low-certainty evidence that tolfenamic acid may not be effective to prevent painful menstruation compared to placebo (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.14; 1 trial, 310 women). Ibuprofen may not reduce menstrual cramps compared to placebo (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.11 to 8.95; 1 trial, 20 women, low-certainty evidence).

DATA SOURCES: A PubMed search was completed in Clinical Queries using the key terms "erythema nodosum".

RESULTS: Clinically, erythema nodosum presents with a sudden onset of painful, erythematous, subcutaneous nodules mainly localized to the pretibial areas. Lesions are usually bilateral and symmetrical, ranging from 1 to 5 cm in diameter. Erythema nodosum may be associated with a variety of conditions such as infection, medications, sarcoidosis, pregnancy, inflammatory bowel disease, vaccination, autoimmune disease, malignancy, and miscellaneous causes. The condition is idiopathic in approximately 50% of cases. The diagnosis is mainly clinical with biopsy reserved for atypical cases. To evaluate for the underlying cause, some basic laboratory screening studies are worthwhile in most cases and include a complete blood cell count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate and/or C-reactive protein, throat swab culture, antistreptococcal O titers, and a chest radiograph. Other tests should be individualized, guided by the history and physical examination results. Most cases of erythema nodosum are self-limited and require no treatment. Bed rest and leg elevation are generally recommended to reduce the discomfort. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are the first-line treatment for pain management.