OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of TENS for managing pain in people with SCD who experience pain crises or chronic pain (or both).
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Haemoglobinopathies Register, comprising of references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. We also searched online trial registries and the reference lists of relevant articles and reviews. Date of the last search: 26 Febraury 2020.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs, where TENS was evaluated for managing pain in people with SCD.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility of the trials identified by the literature searches according to the inclusion criteria. Two review authors then independently extracted data, assessed for risk of bias using the Cochrane standard tool and rated the quality of evidence using the GRADE guidelines.
MAIN RESULTS: One double-blind cross-over RCT with 22 participants with SCD (aged 12 to 27 years) was eligible for inclusion. Following stratification into four pain crises severity grades, participants were then randomised to receive TENS or placebo (sham TENS). The trial was concluded after 60 treatment episodes (30 treatment episodes of each treatment group). There is a lack of clarity regarding the trial design and the analysis of the cross-over data. If a participant was allocated to TENS treatment for an episode of pain and subsequently returned with a further episode of a similar degree of pain, they would then receive the sham TENS treatment (cross-over design). For those experiencing a pain episode of a different severity, it is not clear whether they were re-randomised or given the alternate treatment. Reporting and analysis was based on the total number pain events and not on the number of participants. It is unclear how many participants were crossed over from the TENS group to the sham TENS group and vice versa. The trial had a high risk of bias regarding random sequence generation and allocation concealment; an unclear risk regarding the blinding of participants and personnel; and a low risk regarding the blinding of the outcome assessors and selective outcome reporting. The trial was small and of very low quality; furthermore, given the issue with trial design we were unable to quantitatively analyse the data. Therefore, we present only a narrative summary and caution is advised in interpreting the results. In relation to our pre-defined primary outcomes, the included trial did not report pain relief at two to four weeks post intervention. The trial authors reported that no difference was found in the changes in pain ratings (recorded at one hour and four hours post intervention) between the TENS and the placebo groups. In relation to our secondary outcomes, the analgesic usage during the trial also did not show any difference between groups. Given the quality of the evidence, we are uncertain whether TENS improves overall satisfaction as compared to sham TENS. The ability to cope with activities of daily living was not evaluated. Regarding adverse events, although one case of itching was reported in the TENS group, the site and nature of itching was not clearly stated; hence it cannot be clearly attributed to TENS. Also, two participants receiving 'sham' TENS reported a worsening of pain with the intervention.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Since we have only included one small and very low-quality trial, with a high risk of bias across several domains, we are unable to conclude whether TENS is harmful or beneficial for managing pain in people with SCD. There is a need for a well-designed, adequately-powered, RCT to evaluate the role of TENS in managing pain in people with SCD.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine and evaluate the trajectory of surgical wound pain from day 1 to day 14 after posterior spinal fusion (PSF) surgery in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS).
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Information regarding how the postoperative pain improves with time offers invaluable information not only to the patients and parents but also to assist the clinician in managing postoperative pain.
METHODS: AIS patients who were planned for elective PSF surgery from September 2015 to December 2015 were prospectively recruited into this study. All patients underwent a similar pain management regimen with patient-controlled anesthesia (PCA) morphine, acetaminophen, celecoxib, and oxycodone hydrochloride.
RESULTS: A total of 40 patients (36 F:4 M) were recruited. The visual analogue score (VAS) pain score was highest at 12 hours postoperation (6.0 ± 2.3). It reduced to 3.9 ± 2.2 (day 4), 1.9 ± 1.6 (day 7), and 0.7 ± 1.1 (day 14). The total PCA usage in all patients was 12.4 ± 9.9 mg (first 12 hours), 7.1 ± 8.0 mg (12 to 24 hours), 5.6 ± 6.9 (24-36 hours), and 2.1 ± 6.1 mg (36-48 hours). The celecoxib capsules usage was reducing from 215.0 ± 152.8 mg at 24 hours to 55.0 ± 90.4 mg on day 14. The acetaminophen usage was reducing from 2275 ± 1198 mg at 24 hours to 150 ± 483 mg at day 14. Oxycodone hydrochloride capsules consumption rose to the peak of 1.4 ± 2.8 mg on day 4 before gradually reducing to none by day 13.
CONCLUSION: With an adequate postoperation pain regimen, significant pain should subside to a tolerable level by postoperative day 4 and negligible by postoperative day 7. Patient usually can be discharged on postoperative day 4 when the usage of PCA morphine was not required.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.
AIM OF THE STUDY: To explore the antinociceptive (acute pain) and anti-neuropathic (chronic pain) activities of Lotus corniculatus leaves essential oil (LCEO) in addition to uncovering the possible mechanisms of antinociception.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: LCEO as well as the pure oleanolic acid (OA) compound, were assayed for their effects on acute (formalin induced paw licking test or FIPT) and chronic (cervical contusion injury models on the fifth cervical vertebra or CCS; 14-day intervals) pain. The possible involvements of NO-cGMP-K+ channel, TRPV, dopamine, cannabinoid, PPAR, adrenergic, and opioid mechanisms in the antinociceptive activity of LCEO have studied by formalin test. The levels of p53 and inflammatory markers were measured using a streptavidin biotin immune peroxidase complex and ELISA methods, respectively.
RESULTS: The LCEO and OA exerted antinociceptive activity in the first-phase of FIPT. Pretreatment with antagonists of TRPV1, dopamine D2, cannabinoid type1 and 2, and NO-cGMP-K+ channel blockers (glibenclamide, L-NAME and methylene blue) attenuated the antinociceptive effect of LCEO in FIPT. In addition, LCEO and OA meaningfully reduced hyperalgesia (days 6-14) and mechanical allodynia (days 2-14) in the CCS model. LCEO suppressed the apoptotic marker (p53) in CCS model and also ameliorated IL-2, TNF-α, and IL-1 in the spinal cord.
CONCLUSION: Finally, LCEO inhibited acute (possibly via the modulation of opioid, TRPV, dopamine, cannabinoid mechanisms as well as NO-cGMP-K+ channel) and chronic pain (via suppressing apoptotic and inflammatory markers) in male rats. The results also suggest that OA has analgesic activity against acute and chronic pain conditions.
AIMS: To investigate the effect of intraperitoneal administration of ondansetron for postoperative pain management as an adjuvant to intravenous acetaminophen in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
METHODS: Patients scheduled for elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomized into two groups (n = 25 each) to receive either intraperitoneal ondansetron or saline injected in the gall bladder bed at the end of the procedure. The primary outcome was the difference in pain from baseline to 24-h post-operative assessed by comparing the area under the curve of visual analog score between the two groups.
RESULTS: The derived area under response curve of visual analog scores in the ondansetron group (735.8 ± 418.3) was 33.97% lower than (p = 0.005) that calculated for the control group (1114.4 ± 423.9). The need for rescue analgesia was significantly lower in the ondansetron (16%) versus in the control group (54.17%) (p = 0.005), indicating better pain control. The correlation between the time for unassisted mobilization and the area under response curve of visual analog scores signified the positive analgesic influence of ondansetron (rs =0.315, p = 0.028). The frequency of nausea and vomiting was significantly lower in patients who received ondansetron than that reported in the control group (p = 0.023 (8 h), and 0.016 (24 h) respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: The added positive impact of ondansetron on postoperative pain control alongside its anti-emetic effect made it a unique novel option for patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
METHODS: We recruited 33 (age range from 21 to 72 years) adult patients with a body mass index of 30 kg/m2 and above, who were scheduled for non-cardiac surgeries. Intravenous oxycodone was administered after induction of general anesthesia and blood samples were collected up to 24 h after oxycodone administration. Plasma concentrations of oxycodone were assayed using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry and 253 concentration-time points were used for pharmacokinetic analysis using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling.
RESULTS: Intravenous oxycodone pharmacokinetics were well described by a two-compartment open model. The estimated total clearance and central volume of distribution of oxycodone are 28.5 l/h per 70 kg and 56.4 l per 70 kg, respectively. Total body weight was identified as a significant covariate of the clearance and central volume of distribution. Dosing simulations based on the final model demonstrate that a starting dose of 0.10 mg/kg of intravenous oxycodone is adequate to achieve a target plasma concentration and repeated doses of 0.02 mg/kg may be administered at 1.5-h intervals to maintain a plasma concentration within an effective analgesic range.
CONCLUSIONS: A population pharmacokinetic model using total body weight as a covariate supports the administration of 0.10 mg/kg of intravenous oxycodone as a starting dose and repeated doses of 0.02 mg/kg at 1.5-h intervals to maintain targeted plasma concentrations for analgesia in the obese adult population.
AIM: This study aims to evaluate the anti-inflammation an analgesic activity of the aqueous extract of Launaea arborescens (AqELA) and its pathway of action.
METHODS: the investigation of anti-inflammatory and analgesic effects were done using formalin test, acetic acid test. For mechanism investigation, it was used hot plate test to induce opioid receptors, a histamine and serotonin test to induce edema paw, finally, for the TRPV1 receptor, it was used the capsaicin test.
RESULTS: The aqueous extract of Launaea arborescens showed a significant inhibition of abdominal writhing test 95% and 100% inhibition of licking paw using acid acetic test and formalin test respectively (EC: 47 mg/kg and 104 mg/kg). The analgesic effect of the aqueous extract of Launaea arborescens showed inhibition of sensation of pain after 120 min compared to morphine effect. The aqueous extract of Launaea arborescens reduced paw volume after 180 min and 120 min for histamine and serotonin respectively with dose-dependent. Concerning of TRPV1 receptors, the inhibition was showed at doses 100 mg and 300 mg.
CONCLUSION: Our results contribute towards validation of the traditional use of Launaea arborescens for inflammation ailment.
Methods: This cross-sectional observational study involved 465 adults prescribed analgesics for cancer-related pain from 22 sites across Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam. Pain intensity, pain control satisfaction, and adequacy of analgesics for pain control were documented using questionnaires.
Results: Most patients (84.4%) had stage III or IV cancer. On a scale of 0 (no pain) to 10 (worse pain), patients' mean worst pain intensity over 24 hours was 4.76 (SD 2.47). More physicians (19.0%) than patients (8.0%) reported dissatisfaction with patient's pain control. Concordance of patient-physician satisfaction was low (weighted kappa 0.36; 95% CI 0.03-0.24). Most physicians (71.2%) found analgesics to be adequate for pain control. Patients' and physicians' satisfaction with pain control and physician-assessed analgesic adequacy were significantly different across countries (P < 0.001 for all).
Conclusions: Despite pain-related problems with sleep and quality of life, patients were generally satisfied with their pain control status. Interestingly, physicians were more likely to be dissatisfied with patients' pain control. Enhanced patient-physician communication, physicians' proactivity in managing opioid-induced adverse effects, and accessibility of analgesics have been identified to be crucial for successful cancer pain management. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier NCT02664987).