-
BMJ Evidence-based Medicine May 2024To compare dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) de-escalation with five alternative DAPT strategies in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
De-escalation of dual antiplatelet therapy for patients with acute coronary syndrome after percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVES
To compare dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) de-escalation with five alternative DAPT strategies in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
DESIGN
We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA). Parallel-arm randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DAPT strategies were included and arms of interest were compared via NMA. Partial ranking of each identified arm and for each investigated endpoint was also performed.
SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS
Adult patients with ACS (≥18 years) undergoing PCI with indications for DAPT.
SEARCH METHODS
A comprehensive search covered several databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central, MEDLINE, Conference Proceeding Citation Index-Science) from inception to 15 October 2023. Medical subject headings and keywords related to ACS, PCI and DAPT interventions were used. Reference lists of included studies were screened. Clinical trials registers were searched for ongoing or unpublished trials.
INTERVENTIONS
Six strategies were assessed: T1 arm: acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) and prasugrel for 12 months; T2 arm: ASA and low-dose prasugrel for 12 months; T3 arm: ASA and ticagrelor for 12 months; T4 arm: DAPT de-escalation (ASA+P2Y12 inhibitor for 1-3 months, then single antiplatelet therapy with potent P2Y12 inhibitor or DAPT with clopidogrel); T5 arm: ASA and clopidogrel for 12 months; T6 arm: ASA and clopidogrel for 3-6 months.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Primary outcome: Cardiovascular mortality.
SECONDARY OUTCOMES
bleeding events (all, major, minor), stent thrombosis (ST), stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE).
RESULTS
23 RCTs (75 064 patients with ACS) were included. No differences in cardiovascular mortality, all-cause death, recurrent MI or MACE were found when the six strategies were compared, although with different levels of certainty of evidence. ASA and clopidogrel for 12 or 3-6 months may result in a large increase of ST risk versus ASA plus full-dose prasugrel (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.14 to 3.12, and OR 3.42, 95% CI 1.33 to 7.26, respectively; low certainty evidence for both comparisons). DAPT de-escalation probably results in a reduced risk of all bleedings compared with ASA plus full-dose 12-month prasugrel (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.81, moderate-certainty evidence) and ASA plus 12-month ticagrelor (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.75), while it may not increase the risk of ST. ASA plus 12-month clopidogrel may reduce all bleedings versus ASA plus full-dose 12-month prasugrel (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.94, low certainty) and ASA plus 12-month ticagrelor (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.89).
CONCLUSIONS
DAPT de-escalation and ASA-clopidogrel regimens may reduce bleeding events compared with 12 months ASA and potent P2Y12 inhibitors. 3-6 months or 12-month aspirin-clopidogrel may increase ST risk compared with 12-month aspirin plus potent P2Y12 inhibitors, while DAPT de-escalation probably does not.
Topics: Humans; Acute Coronary Syndrome; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Network Meta-Analysis; Dual Anti-Platelet Therapy; Aspirin; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Hemorrhage; Prasugrel Hydrochloride
PubMed: 38242567
DOI: 10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112476 -
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth Jan 2024To systematically evaluate the efficacy of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) to prevent preeclampsia in high risk pregnant women without thrombophilia. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
To systematically evaluate the efficacy of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) to prevent preeclampsia in high risk pregnant women without thrombophilia.
SEARCH STRATEGY
PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane library were searched for articles published before 1st August 2022 using the combination keywords "preeclampsia", "Low Molecular Weight Heparin", "LMWH", "Heparin, Low Molecular Weight", "Dalteparin", "Nadroparin", and "Tinzaparin".
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials evaluating the use of LMWH in pregnant women at high risk of preeclampsia without thrombophilia.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Ten studies were included in the meta-analysis (1758 patients in total). Outcomes were expressed as relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
RESULTS
LMWH reduced the incidence of PE (RR = 0.67; 95% CI = 0.50-0.90; P = 0.009) in high risk pregnant women without thrombophilia. Subgroup analysis found that the prophylactic effect of LMWH was only significant in studies using low-dose aspirin (LDA) as the primary intervention. The combination of LMWH and LDA was also effective for the prevention of preterm birth and fetal growth restriction, but had no effect on the incidence of placenta abruption.
CONCLUSION
For women at high risk of developing preeclampsia without thrombophilia, the combination of LMWH and low-dose aspirin is effective for the prevention of preeclampsia, preterm birth and fetal growth restriction and is superior to LDA alone.
Topics: Female; Infant, Newborn; Humans; Pregnancy; Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight; Pre-Eclampsia; Pregnancy, High-Risk; Premature Birth; Fetal Growth Retardation; Aspirin; Heparin; Nadroparin; Thrombophilia; Anticoagulants
PubMed: 38233773
DOI: 10.1186/s12884-023-06218-9 -
European Journal of Anaesthesiology Mar 2024Despite being a commonly performed surgical procedure, pain management for appendicectomy is often neglected because of insufficient evidence on the most effective...
BACKGROUND
Despite being a commonly performed surgical procedure, pain management for appendicectomy is often neglected because of insufficient evidence on the most effective treatment options.
OBJECTIVE
To provide evidence-based recommendations by assessing the available literature for optimal pain management after appendicectomy.
DESIGN AND DATA SOURCES
This systematic review-based guideline was conducted according to the PROSPECT methodology. Relevant randomised controlled trials, systematic reviews and meta-analyses in the English language from January 1999 to October 2022 were retrieved from MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Databases using PRISMA search protocols.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
We included studies on adults and children. If articles reported combined data from different surgeries, they had to include specific information about appendicectomies. Studies needed to measure pain intensity using a visual analogue scale (VAS) or a numerical rating scale (NRS). Studies that did not report the precise appendicectomy technique were excluded.
RESULTS
Out of 1388 studies, 94 met the inclusion criteria. Based on evidence and consensus, the PROSPECT members agreed that basic analgesics [paracetamol and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)] should be administered perioperatively for open and laparoscopic appendicectomies. A laparoscopic approach is preferred because of lower pain scores. Additional recommendations for laparoscopic appendicectomies include a three-port laparoscopic approach and the instillation of intraperitoneal local anaesthetic. For open appendicectomy, a preoperative unilateral transverse abdominis plane (TAP) block is recommended. If not possible, preincisional infiltration with local anaesthetics is an alternative. Opioids should only be used as rescue analgesia. Limited evidence exists for TAP block in laparoscopic appendicectomy, analgesic adjuvants for TAP block, continuous wound infiltration after open appendicectomy and preoperative ketamine and dexamethasone. Recommendations apply to children and adults.
CONCLUSION
This review identified an optimal analgesic regimen for open and laparoscopic appendicectomy. Further randomised controlled trials should evaluate the use of regional analgesia and wound infiltrations with adequate baseline analgesia, especially during the recommended conventional three-port approach.
REGISTRATION
The protocol for this study was registered with the PROSPERO database (Registration No. CRD42023387994).
Topics: Adult; Child; Humans; Pain Management; Pain, Postoperative; Analgesics; Acetaminophen; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Anesthetics, Local
PubMed: 38214556
DOI: 10.1097/EJA.0000000000001953 -
Journal of Orthopaedics and... Jan 2024Several clinical investigations have compared different pharmacologic agents for the prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, no consensus has been reached.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Several clinical investigations have compared different pharmacologic agents for the prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, no consensus has been reached. The present investigation compared enoxaparin, fondaparinux, aspirin and non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) commonly used as prophylaxis following total hip arthroplasty (THA). A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed, setting as outcomes of interest the rate of deep venous thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE) and major and minor haemorrhages.
METHODS
This study was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension statement for reporting systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of healthcare interventions. All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing two or more drugs used for the prophylaxis of VTE following THA were accessed. PubMed, Web of Science and Google Scholar databases were accessed in March 2023 with no time constraint.
RESULTS
Data from 31,705 patients were extracted. Of these, 62% (19,824) were women, with age, sex ratio, and body mass index (BMI) being comparable at baseline. Apixaban 5 mg, fondaparinux, and rivaroxaban 60 mg were the most effective in reducing the rate of DVT. Dabigatran 220 mg, apixaban 5 mg, and aspirin 100 mg were the most effective in reducing the rate of PE. Apixaban 5 mg, ximelagatran 2 mg and aspirin 100 mg were associated with the lowest rate of major haemorrhages, while rivaroxaban 2.5 mg, apixaban 5 mg and enoxaparin 40 mg were associated with the lowest rate of minor haemorrhages.
CONCLUSION
Administration of apixaban 5 mg demonstrated the best balance between VTE prevention and haemorrhage control following THA. Level of evidence Level I, network meta-analysis of RCTs.
Topics: Female; Humans; Male; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Aspirin; Enoxaparin; Fibrinolytic Agents; Fondaparinux; Hemorrhage; Network Meta-Analysis; Rivaroxaban; Venous Thromboembolism
PubMed: 38194191
DOI: 10.1186/s10195-023-00742-2 -
Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia =... Feb 2024Tonsillectomy is one of the most common surgical procedures performed in children. Since most clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are designed to support surgical...
PURPOSE
Tonsillectomy is one of the most common surgical procedures performed in children. Since most clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are designed to support surgical decisions, none are specifically designed for the perioperative management of children undergoing tonsillectomy. We aimed to identify and analyze the existing CPGs with recommendations for the perioperative management of children undergoing tonsillectomy by conducting a systematic review.
SOURCE
We searched Embase, MEDLINE, MEDLINE ePub Ahead of Print, and CINAHL for relevant articles published from inception to 3 August 2022. The inclusion criteria were: 1) CPG of perioperative recommendations for tonsillectomy under general anesthesia in children, 2) CPG that include at least one evidence-based recommendation, 3) peer-reviewed CPG published in English after 2000. We extracted data on baseline characteristics of each CPG and general recommendations for perioperative interventions or complications.
PRINCIPAL FINDINGS
Out of five eligible CPGs, AGREE II and REX confirmed that two CPGs were high quality while only one of the two was recommended for implementation without modifications. Most of the recommendations were for pain management. Acetaminophen was the only medication recommended in all five CPG. Except for the oldest CPG, the CPG all supported of the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and steroids as a pain adjunct.
CONCLUSIONS
Acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and steroids are recommended in the perioperative management of pediatric tonsillectomy. Future CPG should further clarify the safe use of opioids based on severity of obstructive sleep apnea and in the context of opioid-sparing techniques, such as dexmedetomidine, high-dose dexamethasone, and gabapentinoids.
STUDY REGISTRATION
PROSPERO (CRD42021253374); first submitted 18 June 2021.
Topics: Humans; Child; Tonsillectomy; Acetaminophen; Analgesics, Opioid; Steroids; Anti-Inflammatory Agents
PubMed: 38182827
DOI: 10.1007/s12630-023-02668-z -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2024Children often require pain management following surgery to avoid suffering. Effective pain management has consequences for healing time and quality of life. Ibuprofen,...
BACKGROUND
Children often require pain management following surgery to avoid suffering. Effective pain management has consequences for healing time and quality of life. Ibuprofen, a frequently used non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) administered to children, is used to treat pain and inflammation in the postoperative period.
OBJECTIVES
1) To assess the efficacy and safety of ibuprofen (any dose) for acute postoperative pain management in children compared with placebo or other active comparators. 2) To compare ibuprofen administered at different doses, routes (e.g. oral, intravenous, etc.), or strategies (e.g. as needed versus as scheduled).
SEARCH METHODS
We used standard Cochrane search methods. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and trials registries in August 2023.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in children aged 17 years and younger, treated for acute postoperative or postprocedural pain, that compared ibuprofen to placebo or any active comparator. We included RCTs that compared different administration routes, doses of ibuprofen and schedules.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We adhered to standard Cochrane methods for data collection and analysis. Our primary outcomes were pain relief reported by the child, pain intensity reported by the child, adverse events, and serious adverse events. We present results using risk ratios (RR) and standardised mean differences (SMD), with the associated confidence intervals (CI). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 43 RCTs that enroled 4265 children (3935 children included in this review). We rated the overall risk of bias at the study level as high or unclear for 37 studies that had one or several unclear or high risk of bias judgements across the domains. We judged six studies as having a low risk of bias across all domains. Ibuprofen versus placebo (35 RCTs) No studies reported pain relief reported by the child or a third party, or serious adverse events. Ibuprofen probably reduces child-reported pain intensity less than two hours postintervention compared to placebo (SMD -1.12, 95% CI -1.39 to -0.86; 3 studies, 259 children; moderate-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen may reduce child-reported pain intensity, two hours to less than 24 hours postintervention (SMD -1.01, 95% CI -1.24 to -0.78; 5 studies, 345 children; low-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen may result in little to no difference in adverse events compared to placebo (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.23; 5 studies, 384 children; low-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen versus paracetamol (21 RCTs) No studies reported pain relief reported by the child or a third party, or serious adverse events. Ibuprofen likely reduces child-reported pain intensity less than two hours postintervention compared to paracetamol (SMD -0.42, 95% CI -0.82 to -0.02; 2 studies, 100 children; moderate-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen may slightly reduce child-reported pain intensity two hours to 24 hours postintervention (SMD -0.21, 95% CI -0.40 to -0.02; 6 studies, 422 children; low-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen may result in little to no difference in adverse events (0 events in each group; 1 study, 44 children; low-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen versus morphine (1 RCT) No studies reported pain relief or pain intensity reported by the child or a third party, or serious adverse events. Ibuprofen likely results in a reduction in adverse events compared to morphine (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.83; risk difference (RD) -0.25, 95% CI -0.40 to -0.09; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 4; 1 study, 154 children; moderate-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen versus ketorolac (1 RCT) No studies reported pain relief or pain intensity reported by the child, or serious adverse events. Ibuprofen may result in a reduction in adverse events compared to ketorolac (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.96; RD -0.29, 95% CI -0.53 to -0.04; NNTB 4; 1 study, 59 children; low-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Despite identifying 43 RCTs, we remain uncertain about the effect of ibuprofen compared to placebo or active comparators for some critical outcomes and in the comparisons between different doses, schedules and routes for ibuprofen administration. This is largely due to poor reporting on important outcomes such as serious adverse events, and poor study conduct or reporting that reduced our confidence in the results, along with small underpowered studies. Compared to placebo, ibuprofen likely results in pain reduction less than two hours postintervention, however, the efficacy might be lower at two hours to 24 hours. Compared to paracetamol, ibuprofen likely results in pain reduction up to 24 hours postintervention. We could not explore if there was a different effect in different kinds of surgeries or procedures. Ibuprofen likely results in a reduction in adverse events compared to morphine, and in little to no difference in bleeding when compared to paracetamol. We remain mostly uncertain about the safety of ibuprofen compared to other drugs.
Topics: Humans; Acetaminophen; Ibuprofen; Ketorolac; Morphine; Pain, Postoperative; Child
PubMed: 38180091
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD015432.pub2 -
European Journal of Orthodontics Jan 2024Pain is an unpleasant experience and annoying sensation. To control this pain during orthodontic separation, different pharmacological and non-pharmacological methods... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Pain is an unpleasant experience and annoying sensation. To control this pain during orthodontic separation, different pharmacological and non-pharmacological methods have been used.
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to critically assess the evidence of the effectiveness of pharmacological and non-pharmacological methods in reducing pain induced by orthodontic separation.
SEARCH STRATEGY
An electronic search was conducted using the following databases: PubMed® (Medline), Scopus®, EMBASE®, Web of ScienceTM, Google ScholarTM, ProQuest, and Cochrane Central Register of controlled trials (CENTRAL) searching for the studies published between January 2012 and April 2023.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included, each experimental group included patients who received elastomeric separators and one kind of pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions for pain reduction during the separation stage.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Cochrane's risk of bias tool (RoB2 tool) was applied. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation [GRADE] approach was used to evaluate the strength of the evidence.
RESULTS
Thirty-one studies (RCTs) were included in this systematic review. Nineteen of them were appropriate for quantitative synthesis and used VAS for pain assessment. Meta-analysis showed that low-level laser therapy (LLLT) was an effective approach for pain relief after separators placement with standard mean difference of 13.79 mm (95% confidence interval (CI): -15.64, -11.94) at 6 h and 23.34 mm at 24 h (95% CI: -25.91, -20.77). LLLT was also effective when applied in split-mouth and the standard mean difference was 8.9 mm at 6 h (95% CI: -12.86, -3.33) and 17.15 mm at 24 h (95% CI: -30.12, -4.17). Ibuprofen had a pain control effect at 6 h and at 24 h compared with the placebo group. The standard mean difference was 14.37 mm (95% CI: -20.54, -8.19) and 20.46 mm (95% CI: -27.79, -13.13), respectively. There was no difference in pain control between ibuprofen and acetaminophen. Naproxen had lower visual analog scale scores in pain perception at 6 h and the standard mean difference was 7.03 mm (95% CI: -12.67, -1.40).
CONCLUSIONS
The application of LLLT decreased the pain induced by the separation during the first day of teeth separation; the pain reduction showed an increase from 6 h to the end of the 24 h. However, the evidence is weak to moderate. The analgesics reduced the pain compared to placebo; this pain reduction had shown an increase from 6 h to the end of the 24 h. The strength of the evidence is moderate. Naproxen gel effectively reduced the pain compared to placebo; the evidence in this regard is moderate. Naproxen gel effectively reduced the pain compared to placebo, but it was less effective than the oral intake of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. However, the evidence in this regard is moderate.
REGISTRATION
This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022335553) during the first stages of its conduction.
Topics: Humans; Ibuprofen; Naproxen; Pain; Acetaminophen; Analgesics
PubMed: 38168817
DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjad078 -
The Western Journal of Emergency... Nov 2023Acetaminophen poisoning is commonly treated by emergency physicians. First-line therapy is N-acetylcysteine (NAC), traditionally administered intravenously via a US Food...
INTRODUCTION
Acetaminophen poisoning is commonly treated by emergency physicians. First-line therapy is N-acetylcysteine (NAC), traditionally administered intravenously via a US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved three-bag protocol in which each bag has a unique concentration and infusion duration. Recently, simplified, off-label two-bag NAC infusion protocols have become more common. The purpose of this review is to summarize the effectiveness and safety of two-bag NAC.
METHODS
We undertook a comprehensive search of PubMed, EMBASE, and MEDLINE from inception to December 13, 2022, for articles describing human acetaminophen poisonings treated with two-bag NAC, defined as any regimen involving two discrete infusions in two separate bags. Outcomes included effectiveness (measured by incidence of liver injury); incidence of non-allergic anaphylactoid reactions (NAAR); gastrointestinal, cutaneous, and systemic reactions; treatments for NAARs; incidence of NAC-related medication errors; and delays or interruptions in NAC administration.
RESULTS
Twelve articles met final inclusion, 10 of which compared two-bag NAC to the three-bag regimen. Nine articles evaluated the two-bag/20-hour regimen, a simplified version of the FDA-approved three-bag regimen in which the traditional first and second bags are combined into a single four-hour infusion. Nine articles assessed comparative effectiveness of two-bag NAC in terms of liver injury, most commonly assessed for by incidence of hepatotoxicity (aspartate aminotransferase or alanine aminotransferase >1,000 international units per liter). No difference in liver injury was observed between two-bag and three-bag regimens. Of nine articles comparing incidence of NAARs, eight demonstrated statistically fewer NAARs with two-bag regimens, and one showed no difference. In seven articles evaluating treatment for NAARs (antihistamines, corticosteroids, epinephrine), all showed that patients received fewer medications for NAARs with two-bag NAC. Three articles evaluated NAC-related medication errors; two demonstrated no difference, while one study evaluating only children showed fewer errors with two-bag NAC. Two studies evaluated delays and/or interruptions in NAC infusions; both favored two-bag NAC.
CONCLUSION
For patients with acetaminophen poisoning, two-bag NAC regimens appear to have similar outcomes to the traditional three-bag regimen in terms of liver injury. Two-bag NAC regimens are associated with fewer adverse events and fewer treatments for those events than the three-bag regimen and fewer interruptions in antidotal therapy.
Topics: Child; Humans; Acetaminophen; Acetylcysteine; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Antidotes; Drug Overdose; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Infusions, Intravenous
PubMed: 38165196
DOI: 10.5811/westjem.59099 -
Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral... Mar 2024To determine the risk of bleeding after minor extraction in patients on different antiplatelet therapy (APT) regimens. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To determine the risk of bleeding after minor extraction in patients on different antiplatelet therapy (APT) regimens.
STUDY DESIGN
A search was conducted using PubMed and Google Scholar. Thirty-five papers were included in the systematic review, of which 23 papers provided the requisite information for meta-analysis. Subgroups were created based on the controls, as follows: (1) no control, (2) healthy control, and (3) interrupted APT control. In a meta-analysis, the studies were further subdivided into immediate and delayed bleeding.
RESULTS
No immediate or delayed bleeding risk was found in patients treated with aspirin vs healthy controls (relative risk [RR] = 1.26; P = .5 and RR = 2.17; P = .09, respectively). A higher immediate bleeding was recorded for patients on single nonaspirin APT vs those in the healthy population (RR = 3.72; P = .0009). A high risk of bleeding was recorded in patients receiving dual APT compared with healthy controls for immediate (RR = 10.3; P < .0001) and delayed (RR = 7.72; P = .001) bleeding. Dual APT continuation showed a higher risk of immediate bleeding (RR = 2.13) than interrupted APT, but the difference was insignificant (P = .07).
CONCLUSIONS
Dental extraction can be performed safely in patients on aspirin monotherapy. In contrast, patients receiving dual APT should be considered at risk for immediate and continued bleeding.
Topics: Humans; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Postoperative Hemorrhage; Patients; Aspirin; Tooth Extraction
PubMed: 38155005
DOI: 10.1016/j.oooo.2023.10.006 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2023Many children undergo various surgeries, which often lead to acute postoperative pain. This pain influences recovery and quality of life. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Many children undergo various surgeries, which often lead to acute postoperative pain. This pain influences recovery and quality of life. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), specifically cyclo-oxygenase (COX) inhibitors such as diclofenac, can be used to treat pain and reduce inflammation. There is uncertainty regarding diclofenac's benefits and harms compared to placebo or other drugs for postoperative pain.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of diclofenac (any dose) for acute postoperative pain management in children compared with placebo, other active comparators, or diclofenac administered by different routes (e.g. oral, rectal, etc.) or strategies (e.g. 'as needed' versus 'as scheduled').
SEARCH METHODS
We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and trial registries on 11 April 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in children under 18 years of age undergoing surgery that compared diclofenac (delivered in any dose and route) to placebo or any active pharmacological intervention. We included RCTs comparing different administration routes of diclofenac and different strategies.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were: pain relief (PR) reported by the child, defined as the proportion of children reporting 50% or better postoperative pain relief; pain intensity (PI) reported by the child; adverse events (AEs); and serious adverse events (SAEs). We presented results using risk ratios (RR), mean differences (MD), and standardised mean differences (SMD), with the associated confidence intervals (CI).
MAIN RESULTS
We included 32 RCTs with 2250 children. All surgeries were done using general anaesthesia. Most studies (27) included children above age three. Only two studies had an overall low risk of bias; 30 had an unclear or high risk of bias in one or several domains. Diclofenac versus placebo (three studies) None of the included studies reported on PR or PI. We are very uncertain about the benefits and harms of diclofenac versus placebo on nausea/vomiting (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.80; 2 studies, 100 children) and any reported bleeding (RR 3.00, 95% CI 0.34 to 26.45; 2 studies, 100 children), both very low-certainty evidence. None of the included studies reported SAEs. Diclofenac versus opioids (seven studies) We are very uncertain if diclofenac reduces PI at 2 to 24 hours postoperatively compared to opioids (median pain intensity 0.3 (interquartile range (IQR) 0.0 to 2.5) for diclofenac versus median 0.7 (IQR 0.1 to 2.4) in the opioid group; 1 study, 50 children; very low-certainty evidence). None of the included studies reported on PR or PI for other time points. Diclofenac probably results in less nausea/vomiting compared to opioids (41.0% in opioids, 31.0% in diclofenac; RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.96; 7 studies, 463 participants), and probably increases any reported bleeding (5.4% in opioids, 16.5% in diclofenac; RR 3.06, 95% CI 1.31 to 7.13; 2 studies, 222 participants), both moderate-certainty evidence. None of the included studies reported SAEs. Diclofenac versus paracetamol (10 studies) None of the included studies assessed child-reported PR. Compared to paracetamol, we are very uncertain if diclofenac: reduces PI at 0 to 2 hours postoperatively (SMD -0.45, 95% CI -0.74 to -0.15; 2 studies, 180 children); reduces PI at 2 to 24 hours postoperatively (SMD -0.64, 95% CI -0.89 to -0.39; 3 studies, 300 children); reduces nausea/vomiting (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.87; 5 studies, 348 children); reduces bleeding events (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.12 to 2.62; 5 studies, 332 participants); or reduces SAEs (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.22; 1 study, 60 children). The evidence certainty was very low for all outcomes. Diclofenac versus bupivacaine (five studies) None of the included studies reported on PR or PI. Compared to bupivacaine, we are very uncertain about the effect of diclofenac on nausea/vomiting (RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.58 to 2.78; 3 studies, 128 children) and SAEs (RR 4.52, 95% CI 0.23 to 88.38; 1 study, 38 children), both very low-certainty evidence. Diclofenac versus active pharmacological comparator (10 studies) We are very uncertain about the benefits and harms of diclofenac versus any other active pharmacological comparator (dexamethasone, pranoprofen, fluorometholone, oxybuprocaine, flurbiprofen, lignocaine), and for different routes and delivery of diclofenac, due to few and small studies, no reporting of key outcomes, and very low-certainty evidence for the reported outcomes. We are unable to draw any meaningful conclusions from the numerical results.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We remain uncertain about the efficacy of diclofenac compared to placebo, active comparators, or by different routes of administration, for postoperative pain management in children. This is largely due to authors not reporting on clinically important outcomes; unclear reporting of the trials; or poor trial conduct reducing our confidence in the results. We remain uncertain about diclofenac's safety compared to placebo or active comparators, except for the comparison of diclofenac with opioids: diclofenac probably results in less nausea and vomiting compared with opioids, but more bleeding events. For healthcare providers managing postoperative pain, diclofenac is a COX inhibitor option, along with other pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches. Healthcare providers should weigh the benefits and risks based on what is known of their respective pharmacological effects, rather than known efficacy. For surgical interventions in which bleeding or nausea and vomiting are a concern postoperatively, the risks of adverse events using opioids or diclofenac for managing pain should be considered.
Topics: Humans; Child; Adolescent; Diclofenac; Acetaminophen; Pain, Postoperative; Nausea; Vomiting; Analgesics, Opioid; Bupivacaine
PubMed: 38078559
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD015087.pub2