METHODOLOGY: The study was designed as a double-blind, randomized controlled trial involving 94 patients who underwent open thyroidectomy or parathyroidectomy in Hospital Pulau Pinang, Malaysia, from November 2015 to November 2016. The study compared the efficacy of pre-incision wound infiltration of diclofenac (n = 47) versus bupivacaine (n = 47) in post-operative pain relief. Wound infiltration is given prior to skin incision. Mean pain score at designated time interval within the 24-h post-operative period, time to first analgesia, total analgesic usage and total analgesic cost were assessed.
RESULTS: Ninety-four patients were recruited with no dropouts. Mean age was 49.3 (SD = 14.2) with majority being female (74.5%). Ethnic distribution recorded 42.6% Chinese, 38.3% Malay, followed by 19.1% Indian. Mean duration of surgery was 123.8 min (SD = 56.5), and mean length of hospital stay was 4.7 days (SD = 1.8). The characteristics of patient in both groups were generally comparable except that there were more cases of total thyroidectomy in the diclofenac group (n = 31) as compared to the bupivacaine group (n = 16). Mean pain score peaked at immediate post-operative period (post-operative 0.5 h) with a score of 3.5 out of 10 and the level decreased steadily over the next 20 h starting from 4 h post-operatively. Pre-incision wound infiltration using diclofenac had better pain control as compared to bupivacaine at all time interval assessed. In the resting state, the mean post-operative pain score difference was statistically significant at 2 h [2.1 (SD = 1.5) vs. 2.8 (SD = 1.8), p = 0.04]. During neck movement, the dynamic pain score difference was statistically significant at post-operative 1 h [2.7 (SD = 1.9) vs. 3.7 (SD = 2.1), p = 0.02]; 2 h [2.7 (SD = 1.6) vs. 3.7 (SD = 2.0), p = 0.01]; 4 h [2.2 (SD = 1.5) vs. 2.9 (SD = 1.7), p = 0.04], 6 h [1.9 (SD = 1.4) vs. 2.5 (SD = 1.6), p = 0.04] and 12 h [1.5 (SD = 1.5) vs. 2.2 (SD = 1.4), p = 0.03]. Mean dose of tramadol used as rescue analgesia in 24 h duration was lower in the diclofenac group as compared to bupivacaine group [13.8 mg (SD = 24.9) vs. 36.2 mg (SD = 45.1), p = 0.01]. The total cost of analgesia used was significantly cheaper in diclofenac group as compared to bupivacaine group [RM 3.47 (SD = 1.51) vs. RM 13.43 (SD = 1.68), p diclofenac provides better post-operative pain relief compared to bupivacaine for patient who had underwent open thyroidectomy or parathyroidectomy. Diclofenac is cheap and easily available in the limited resource setting. This approach offers a superior alternative for post-operative pain relief as compared to bupivacaine.
AIMS: The aims of this study were to determine the efficacy of rectal diclofenac in preventing PEP and to evaluate any adverse events.
METHODS: This was a randomized, open-label, two-arm, prospective clinical trial. Only patients at high risk of developing PEP were recruited. They received 100 mg rectal diclofenac or no intervention immediately after ERCP. The patients were reviewed 30 days after discharge to evaluate any adverse event.
RESULTS: Among 144 recruited patients, 69 (47.9%) received diclofenac and 75 (52.1%) had no intervention. Eleven patients (7.6%) developed PEP, in which seven were from the diclofenac group and four were in the control group. Eight cases of PEP (5.5%) were mild and three cases (2.1%) were moderate. The differences in pancreatitis incidence and severity between both groups were not statistically significant. There were 11 adverse events reported. Clinically significant bleeding happened in four patients (2.8%): one from the diclofenac group and three from the control group. Other events included cholangitis: two patients (2.9%) from the diclofenac group and four (5.3%) from the control group. One patient from the diclofenac group (1.4%) had a perforation which was treated conservatively.
CONCLUSIONS: In summary, prophylactic rectal diclofenac did not significantly decrease the incidence of PEP among patients at high risk for developing PEP. However, the administration of diclofenac was fairly safe with few clinical adverse events.
OBJECTIVES: The anti-inflammatory and anti-catabolic actions of Diclofenac were compared with apigenin-C-glycosides rich Clinacanthus nutans (CN) leaf extract in osteoporotic-osteoarthritis rats.
METHODS: Female Sprague Dawley rats were randomized into five groups (n = 6). Four groups were bilateral ovariectomised for osteoporosis development, and osteoarthritis were induced by intra-articular injection of monosodium iodoacetate (MIA) into the right knee joints. The Sham group was sham-operated, received saline injection and deionized drinking water. The treatment groups were orally given 200 or 400 mg extract/kg body weight or 5 mg diclofenac /kg body weight daily for 28 days. Articular cartilage and bone changes were monitored by gross and histological structures, micro-CT analysis, serum protein biomarkers, and mRNA expressions for inflammation and catabolic protease genes.
RESULTS: HPLC analysis confirmed that apigenin-C-glycosides (shaftoside, vitexin, and isovitexin) were the major compounds in the extract. The extract significantly and dose-dependently reduced cartilage erosion, bone loss, cartilage catabolic changes, serum osteoporotic-osteoarthritis biomarkers (procollagen-type-II-N-terminal-propeptide PIINP; procollagen-type-I-N-terminal-propeptide PINP; osteocalcin), inflammation (IL-1β) and mRNA expressions for nuclear-factor-kappa-beta NF-κβ, interleukin-1-beta IL-1β, cyclooxygenase-2; and matrix-metalloproteinase-13 MMP13 activities, in osteoporotic-osteoarthritis rats comparable to Diclofenac.
CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that apigenin-C-glycosides at 400 mg CN extract/kg (about 0.2 mg apigenin-equivalent/kg) is comparable to diclofenac in suppressing inflammation and catabolic proteases for osteoporotic-osteoarthritis prevention. Graphical abstract.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the utilization of coxibs and traditional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (tNSAIDs) indicated for postoperative orthopaedic pain control using defined daily dose (DDD) and ratio of use density to use rate (UD/UR).
METHOD: A retrospective drug utilization review (DUR) of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) at an inpatient department of a private teaching hospital in Seremban, Malaysia was conducted. Patients' demographic characteristics, medications prescribed, clinical lab results, visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores and length of hospital stay were documented. Orthopaedic surgeries, namely arthroscopy, reconstructive, and fracture fixation, were included. Stratified random sampling was used to select patients. Data were collected through patients' medical records. The DDD per 100 admissions and the indicator UD/UR were calculated with the World Health Organization's DDD as a benchmark. The inclusion criteria were patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery prescribed with coxibs (celecoxib capsules, etoricoxib tablets, parecoxib injections) and tNSAIDs (dexketoprofen injections, diclofenac sodium tablets). Data were analysed descriptively. This research was approved by the academic institution and the hospital research ethics committee.
RESULT: A total of 195 records of patients who received NSAIDs were randomly selected among 1169 cases. In term of the types of orthopaedic surgery, the ratio of included records for arthroscopy:fracture fixation:reconstructive surgery was 55.4:35.9:8.7. Most of the inpatients had low rates of common comorbidities such as cardiovascular disease as supported by their baseline parameters. The majority were not prescribed with other concomitant prescriptions that could cause drug interaction (74.9%), or gastroprotective agents (77.4%). Overall, DDDs per 100 admissions for all NSAIDs were less than 100, except for parecoxib injections (389.23). The UD/UR for all NSAIDs were less than 100, except for etoricoxib tablets (105.75) and parecoxib injections (108.00).
DISCUSSION: As per guidelines, the majority (96.9%) received other analgesics to ensure a multimodal approach was carried out to control pain. From the UD/UR results, the arthroscopy surgery was probably the most appropriate in terms of NSAID utilization.
CONCLUSION: The prescribing pattern of NSAIDs except parecoxib was appropriate based on adverse effect and concurrent medication profile. The findings of this DUR provide insight for a low-risk patient population at a private specialized teaching hospital on the recommended use of NSAIDs for postoperative orthopaedic pain control.