-
International Journal of Colorectal... Jan 2023To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of different analgesic interventions in the treatment of pain after open hemorrhoidectomy by systematic review and network... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of different analgesic interventions in the treatment of pain after open hemorrhoidectomy by systematic review and network meta-analysis.
METHODS
Randomized controlled trials that met the inclusion criteria in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, CNKI, WANFANG DATA, and VIP were searched from the date of database construction to June 28, 2022.
RESULTS
Among the 13 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 731 patients were included in the network meta-analysis. Most interventions are more effective than placebo in relieving postoperative pain. 24 h postoperative Visual Analogue Scale (VAS): glyceryl trinitrate (GTN) (mean difference (MD) - 4.20, 95% CI - 5.35, - 3.05), diltiazem (MD - 1.97, 95% CI - 2.44, - 1.51), botulinum toxin (BT) (MD - 1.50, 95% CI - 2.25, - 0.75), sucralfate (MD - 1.01, 95% CI - 1.53, - 0.49), and electroacupuncture (EA) (MD - 0.45, 95% CI - 0.87, - 0.04). 48 h postoperative VAS: diltiazem (MD - 2.45, 95% CI - 2.74, - 2.15), BT (MD - 2.18, 95% CI - 2.52, - 1.84), and sucralfate (MD - 1.41, 95% CI - 1.85, - 0.97). 7 d postoperative VAS: diltiazem (MD - 2.49, 95% CI - 3.20, - 1.78) and sucralfate (MD - 1.42, 95% CI - 2.00, - 0.85). The first postoperative defecation VAS: EA (MD - 0.70, 95% CI - 0.95, - 0.46). There are few data on intervention safety, and additional high-quality RCTs are expected to study this topic in the future.
CONCLUSION
Diltiazem ointment may be the most effective medication for pain relief following open hemorrhoidectomy, and it can dramatically reduce pain within one week of surgery. The second and third recommended medications are BT and sucralfate ointment. GTN has a significant advantage in alleviating pain 24 h after open hemorrhoidectomy, but whether it causes headache is debatable; thus, it should be used with caution. EA's analgesic efficacy is still unknown. There was limited evidence on the safety of the intervention in this study, and it was simply presented statistically.
Topics: Humans; Hemorrhoidectomy; Diltiazem; Ointments; Sucralfate; Network Meta-Analysis; Analgesics; Nitroglycerin; Pain, Postoperative; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36609578
DOI: 10.1007/s00384-022-04294-5 -
Integrative Medicine Research Mar 2022Women experience pain from a number of causes during the postpartum period. Although pharmacological pain relief has shown to be effective, the efficacy of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Women experience pain from a number of causes during the postpartum period. Although pharmacological pain relief has shown to be effective, the efficacy of non-pharmacological methods of pain relief will be of interest to breastfeeding women. The aim of this systematic review was to examine the efficacy and safety of complementary approaches to manage postpartum pain.
METHODS
A search of English language databases from their inception to 2020 was undertaken for randomised controlled trials and included primiparous and multiparous women who experienced postpartum pain up to two weeks post birth. The primary outcome was pain. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool.
RESULTS
Thirty trials were included in the review, 25 trials (2,413 women) were included in the meta-analysis. Two trials of massage found a reduction in pain following caesarean birth within the first 24 h post birth (MD -2.64, 95-2.82 to -2.46, 184 women, I 0%), and at seven days postpartum (MD -1.91, 95%CI -2.42 to -1.40, 2 trials, 120 women I 37%). Two trials conducted with women receiving an episiotomy found reduction in perineal pain from herbal ointments within 24 h (MD -1.33, 95% CI -.96 to -0.70, 221 women) and at 14 days postpartum (MD -0.74, 95% CI -1.02 to -0.47, 4 trials). Few trials reported on safety, few trials were at an overall low risk of bias, and overall the quality of evidence was very low.
CONCLUSION
Further high quality trials are needed to determine the safety and effectiveness of herbal ointment and massage during the early postpartum period.
PubMed: 34485073
DOI: 10.1016/j.imr.2021.100758 -
The Journal of Laryngology and Otology Dec 2017The mainstay of management of epistaxis refractory to first aid and cautery is intranasal packing. This review aimed to identify evidence surrounding nasal pack use. (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
BACKGROUND
The mainstay of management of epistaxis refractory to first aid and cautery is intranasal packing. This review aimed to identify evidence surrounding nasal pack use.
METHOD
A systematic review of the literature was performed using standardised methodology.
RESULTS
Twenty-seven eligible articles were identified relating to non-dissolvable packs and nine to dissolvable packs. Nasal packing appears to be more effective when applied by trained professionals. For non-dissolvable packs, the re-bleed rates for Rapid Rhino and Merocel were similar, but were higher with bismuth iodoform paraffin paste packing. Rapid Rhino packs were the most tolerated non-dissolvable packs. Evidence indicates that 96 per cent of re-bleeding occurs within the first 4 hours after nasal pack removal. Limited evidence suggests that dissolvable packs are effective and well tolerated by patients. There was a lack of evidence relating to: the duration of pack use, the economic effects of pack choice and the appropriate care setting for non-dissolvable packs.
CONCLUSION
Rapid Rhino packs are the best tolerated, with efficacy equivalent to nasal tampons. FloSeal is easy to use, causes less discomfort and may be superior to Merocel in anterior epistaxis cases. There is no strong evidence to support prophylactic antibiotic use.
Topics: Adult; Combined Modality Therapy; Electrocoagulation; Epistaxis; First Aid; Hemostatics; Humans; Tampons, Surgical; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 29280695
DOI: 10.1017/S0022215117002055 -
Supportive Care in Cancer : Official... Nov 2013The aim of this project was to develop clinical practice guidelines on the use of antimicrobials, mucosal coating agents, anesthetics, and analgesics for the prevention... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
The aim of this project was to develop clinical practice guidelines on the use of antimicrobials, mucosal coating agents, anesthetics, and analgesics for the prevention and management of oral mucositis (OM) in cancer patients.
METHODS
A systematic review of the available literature was conducted. The body of evidence for the use of each agent, in each setting, was assigned a level of evidence. Based on the evidence level, one of the following three guideline determinations was possible: recommendation, suggestion, or no guideline possible.
RESULTS
A recommendation was developed in favor of patient-controlled analgesia with morphine in hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) patients. Suggestions were developed in favor of transdermal fentanyl in standard dose chemotherapy and HSCT patients and morphine mouth rinse and doxepin rinse in head and neck radiation therapy (H&N RT) patients. Recommendations were developed against the use of topical antimicrobial agents for the prevention of mucositis. These included recommendations against the use of iseganan for mucositis prevention in HSCT and H&N RT and against the use of antimicrobial lozenges (polymyxin-tobramycin-amphotericin B lozenges/paste and bacitracin-clotrimazole-gentamicin lozenges) for mucositis prevention in H&N RT. Recommendations were developed against the use of the mucosal coating agent sucralfate for the prevention or treatment of chemotherapy-induced or radiation-induced OM. No guidelines were possible for any other agent due to insufficient and/or conflicting evidence.
CONCLUSION
Additional well-designed research is needed on prevention and management approaches for OM.
Topics: Analgesics; Anesthetics; Anti-Infective Agents; Anti-Ulcer Agents; Chemoradiotherapy; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Humans; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Stomatitis; Sucralfate
PubMed: 23832272
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-013-1871-y -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2022Corneal abrasion is a common disorder frequently faced by ophthalmologists, emergency physicians, and primary care physicians. Ocular antibiotics are one of the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Corneal abrasion is a common disorder frequently faced by ophthalmologists, emergency physicians, and primary care physicians. Ocular antibiotics are one of the management options for corneal abrasion. A comprehensive summary and synthesis of the evidence on antibiotic prophylaxis in traumatic corneal abrasion is thus far unavailable, therefore we conducted this review to evaluate the current evidence regarding this important issue.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the safety and efficacy of topical antibiotic prophylaxis following corneal abrasion. Our objectives were 1) to investigate the incidence of infection with antibiotics versus placebo or alternative antibiotics in people with corneal abrasion; and 2) to investigate time to clinical cure, defined as complete healing (re-epithelialization) of the epithelium, with antibiotics versus placebo or alternative antibiotics in people with corneal abrasion.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register; 2021, Issue 4), Ovid MEDLINE, Embase.com, PubMed, the Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature database (LILACS), ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic search for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 25 April 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing antibiotic with another antibiotic or placebo in children and adults with corneal abrasion due to any cause.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methodology and assessed the certainty of the body of evidence for the prespecified outcomes using the GRADE classification.
MAIN RESULTS
Our search of the electronic databases yielded 8661 records. We screened 7690 titles and abstracts after removal of duplicates. We retrieved 32 full-text reports for further review. We included two studies that randomized a total of 527 eyes of 527 participants in the review. One study was conducted in Denmark, and one was conducted in India. The two studies did not examine most of our prespecified primary and secondary outcomes. The first study was a parallel-group RCT comparing chloramphenicol ocular ointment with fusidic acid ocular gels (frequency was not clearly reported). This study enrolled 153 participants older than 5 years of age with corneal abrasion in Denmark with a one-day follow-up duration. No participants had secondary infection in the fusidic acid group, whereas three (4.1%) participants in the chloramphenicol group had a slight reaction (risk ratio [RR] 0.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.01 to 2.79; 144 participants; very low certainty evidence). Thirty-one (44.3%) participants in the fusidic acid arm and 34 (46.6%) participants in the chloramphenicol arm were cured (defined as the area of abrasion zero and no infection) at day 1 (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.34; 144 participants; very low certainty evidence). Without providing specific data, the study reported that the degree of pain was not affected by the interventions received. The most common adverse events reported were itching and discomfort of the eye, which occurred in approximately one-third of participants in each group (low certainty evidence). A second multicenter, two-arm RCT conducted in India enrolled 374 participants older than 5 years of age with corneal abrasion who presented within 48 hours after injury. This study investigated the effect of a three-day course of either ocular ointment combinations of chloramphenicol-clotrimazole or chloramphenicol-placebo (all three times daily). At day 3, 169 (100%) participants in the chloramphenicol-clotrimazole arm and 203 (99%) out of 205 participants in the chloramphenicol-placebo arm were cured without any complication, defined as complete epithelialization of the cornea without evidence of infection (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.03; 374 participants; very low certainty evidence). Four participants assigned to the chloramphenicol-placebo arm experienced mild adverse events: two participants (1%) had mild chemosis and irritation, and two (1%) had small single sterile corneal infiltrates (low certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Given the low to very low certainty of the available evidence, any beneficial effects of antibiotic prophylaxis in preventing ocular infection or accelerating epithelial healing following a corneal abrasion remain unclear. Moreover, the current evidence is insufficient to support any antibiotic regimen being superior to another. There is a need for a well-designed RCT assessing the efficacy and safety of ocular antibiotics in the treatment of corneal abrasion with a particular focus on high-risk populations and formulation of interventions.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Child; Chloramphenicol; Clotrimazole; Corneal Injuries; Fusidic Acid; Humans; Multicenter Studies as Topic; Ointments
PubMed: 35622535
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014617.pub2 -
Brain & Spine 2021During lumbar decompressive spine surgery, the epidural space is easily accessible. This intraoperative situation allows surgeons to apply an epidural bolus of analgesia... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
During lumbar decompressive spine surgery, the epidural space is easily accessible. This intraoperative situation allows surgeons to apply an epidural bolus of analgesia at the end of the surgical procedure. In literature, several papers about the methods and effectiveness of delivering local analgesia during lumbar decompressive spine surgery have been published.
RESEARCH QUESTION
This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to summaries the current literature on the effectiveness and safety of intraoperative epidural analgesia in lumbar decompressive surgery, delivered as a bolus.
MATERIAL AND METHOD
A systematic search was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials or comparative cohort studies of patients aged 18 years or older who underwent decompressive lumbar spine surgery. Nonsteroidal epidural analgesia had to be administered as a bolus, intraoperatively, as an adjunct to standard analgesia therapy. Primary outcome measures were reduction in postoperative pain scores, analgesics consumption and length of hospital stay. Secondary outcomes were adverse events.
RESULTS
Eight studies evaluating the effectiveness of intraoperative epidural analgesia were included. Seven studies reported statistically significant reductions in postoperative VAS-pain scores. Six studies reported a statistically significant decrease in postoperative analgesics consumption. Four studies reported on the length of hospital stay, with no statistically significant difference between study groups.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
This systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that additional intraoperative epidural nonsteroidal analgesia, delivered as a bolus, can reduce postoperative pain and postoperative analgesics consumption in patients undergoing decompressive spinal surgery. Further well-powered research is needed to bolster the evidence.
PubMed: 36247401
DOI: 10.1016/j.bas.2021.100306 -
Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic, and... 2005To review the literature on nipple pain and to delineate effective strategies for the prevention and treatment of nipple pain in breastfeeding mothers. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To review the literature on nipple pain and to delineate effective strategies for the prevention and treatment of nipple pain in breastfeeding mothers.
DATA SOURCES
Computerized searches on MEDLINE, Pre-MEDLINE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library.
STUDY SELECTION
Articles from indexed journals relevant to the objective were reviewed from January 1983 to April 2004. Preference was given to research-based studies in English.
DATA EXTRACTION
Data were extracted and organized under two headings: prevention of nipple pain or trauma and treatment of nipple pain or trauma. The Critical Appraisal Form by J. Briggs was used to extract the data from research-based articles.
DATA SYNTHESIS
The health benefits of breastfeeding for mother and infant are well documented; however, nipple pain is a common reason reported by women for the early termination of breastfeeding. Several studies have compared various treatments for either the prevention of or treatment for nipple pain. These treatments include warm water compresses, tea bag compresses, heat, application of expressed mother's milk, lanolin, vitamin A, collagenase, dexpanthenol, hydrogel therapy, glycerin gel therapy, moist occlusive dressing, education regarding proper latch-on and positioning, and no treatment.
CONCLUSIONS
No one topical agent showed superior results in the relief of nipple discomfort. The most important factor in decreasing the incidence of nipple pain is the provision of education in relation to proper breastfeeding technique and latch-on as well as anticipatory guidance regarding the high incidence of early postpartum nipple pain.
Topics: Administration, Cutaneous; Bandages; Breast Feeding; Clinical Nursing Research; Collagenases; Glycerol; Humans; Lanolin; Maternal-Child Nursing; Nipples; Nursing Evaluation Research; Ointments; Pain; Pain Management; Pantothenic Acid; Patient Education as Topic; Posture; Prenatal Care; Primary Prevention; Puerperal Disorders; Research Design; Skin Care; Time Factors; Vitamin A
PubMed: 16020410
DOI: 10.1177/0884217505276056 -
Journal of International Society of... 2019iRoot BP Plus, also known as EndoSequence root repair material (EERM) is a premixed bioceramic thick/putty. According to its instruction manual, iRoot BP Plus is... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
iRoot BP Plus, also known as EndoSequence root repair material (EERM) is a premixed bioceramic thick/putty. According to its instruction manual, iRoot BP Plus is composed of tricalcium silicate, zirconium oxide, tantalum pentoxide, dicalcium silicate, calcium sulfate, calcium phosphate monobasic, and filler agents. This systematic review was carried out to evaluate and present the iRoot BP Plus material as a pulp-capping agent.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic search for articles with the scope of the selection criteria undergoing for data extraction was conducted through electronic databases. Studies on evaluation of the cytotoxicity, bioactivity, and dentinal bridge formation of iRoot BP, iRoot BP Plus, ERRM putty, or ERRM paste (ERRM) on variant human cells were selected for models, and dentinal bridge formation on human and animals teeth for in vivo models were selected.
RESULTS
A total of 22 articles were discussed in the review, 14 studies, five studies, and three articles with both studies. Methyl thiazol tetrazolium was the most used method for evaluating cytotoxicity. As for dentinal bridge formation, histological assessment and micro-Computed tomography were used. Human dental pulp cells (hDPCs) were the most investigated for models and rats for models. Except for one study, all studies involved in this review were primarily examining the material and comparing it to different types of mineral trioxide aggregate.
CONCLUSION
iRoot BP, iRoot BP Plus, and ERRM are biocompatible materials that enhance hDPCs and other variant human cells proliferation, migration, attachment adhesion, mineralization, and dentinal bridge formation.
PubMed: 32039073
DOI: 10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_249_19 -
The Journal of Dermatology Apr 2023Intra- and transdermal administration of substances via percutaneous injection is effective but considered painful, and inconvenient in addition to bringing forth... (Review)
Review
Intra- and transdermal administration of substances via percutaneous injection is effective but considered painful, and inconvenient in addition to bringing forth biohazardous waste material. In contrast to injection, topical drug application, which includes ointments, creams and lotions, increases the local drug load. Moreover, it has reduced side effects compared to systemic administration. However, the epidermis poses a barrier to high molecular weight substances, limiting the delivery efficiency. Dissolving microneedles (DMN) are hydrophilic, mostly polymer-based constructs that are capable of skin penetration and were developed to provide painless and direct dermal drug delivery. This systematic review provides a comprehensive overview of the available clinical evidence for the use of DMN to treat various skin conditions. According to the PRISMA statement, a systematic search for articles on the use of DMN for dermatological indications was conducted on three different databases (Pubmed, Embase, and the Cochrane library). Only human clinical trials were considered. Qualitative assessment was done by two separate reviewers using the Cochrane risk of bias (RoB 2) and Chambers' criteria assessment tools. The search yielded 1090 articles. After deduplication and removal of ineligible records, 889 records were screened on title and abstract. Full text screening was done for 18 articles and ultimately 17 articles were included of which 15 were randomized controlled trials and two were case series. The quality assessment showed that the majority of included studies had low to no risk of bias. Clinical data supports that DMN are an excellent, effective, and pain free drug delivery method for multiple dermatological disorders including skin aging, hyperpigmentation, psoriasis, warts, and keloids by supplying a painless and effective vehicle for intradermal/intralesional drug administration. Microneedle technology provides a promising non- to minimally-invasive alternative to percutaneous injection.
Topics: Humans; Microinjections; Skin; Administration, Cutaneous; Drug Delivery Systems; Epidermis; Needles; Pain
PubMed: 36700529
DOI: 10.1111/1346-8138.16732 -
Quintessence International (Berlin,... 2019The effect of gingival retraction paste versus gingival retraction cord on periodontal tissue health is controversial. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
The effect of gingival retraction paste versus gingival retraction cord on periodontal tissue health is controversial. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of gingival retraction paste versus gingival retraction cord on periodontal health by a systematic review and meta-analysis and to provide scientific guidelines for gingival retraction method selection in clinical work.
DATA SOURCES
The databases were systematically queried to collect studies exploring the effect of gingival retraction methods on periodontal tissue health in randomized controlled trials. Literature covering the period of January 1998 to April 2017 was extracted and the quality was assessed, followed by a random-effects meta-analysis with standardized mean differences and 95% confidence intervals. Eight studies met the inclusion criteria. The result of meta-analysis revealed that gingival retraction paste exhibited a less deleterious effect on the periodontal tissue compared with the gingival retraction cord technique measured by probing depth, Gingival Bleeding Index, and bleeding on probing (P < .05). However, no statistically significant differences were found in the measurements of Plaque Index, Gingival Index, and gingival recession between these two methods (P > .05).
CONCLUSIONS
Gingival retraction paste can work better than the gingival retraction cord method in protecting periodontal tissue health.
Topics: Dental Plaque Index; Gingiva; Gingival Recession; Gingival Retraction Techniques; Humans; Periodontal Index
PubMed: 30773575
DOI: 10.3290/j.qi.a41976