Explore the vast range of titles available.

In this trial comparing methadone with buprenorphine in opioid-dependent pregnant women, neonates exposed to buprenorphine required less morphine to treat neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) and had a significantly shorter duration of hospitalization and of treatment for NAS. Opioid dependence during pregnancy is compounded by multiple risk factors contributing to adverse maternal, neonatal, and long-term developmental consequences. 1 – 6 Improved treatment options should reduce the public health and medical costs associated with the treatment of neonates exposed to opioids, which in 2009 was estimated at $70.6 million to $112.6 million in the United States alone. 7 Just as the use of methadone in nonpregnant patients with opioid dependence improves patient outcomes, 8 its use as part of a comprehensive approach to the care of pregnant women improves maternal and neonatal outcomes, as compared with no treatment and with medication-assisted withdrawal. 4 , . . .

In this prospective study, we compared the efficacy and side effects of indomethacin, ibuprofen, and paracetamol in patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) closure in preterm neonates. Three hundred preterm neonates with hemodynamically significant PDA (hs-PDA) admitted at our neonatal intensive care unit were enrolled in the study. They were randomized into three groups. Group I (paracetamol group) received 15 mg/kg/6 h IV paracetamol infusion for 3 days. Group II (ibuprofen group) received 10 mg/kg IV ibuprofen infusion followed by 5 mg/kg/day for 2 days. Group III (indomethacin group) received 0.2 mg/kg/12 h indomethacin IV infusion for three doses. Laboratory investigations such as renal function test, liver function test, complete blood count, and blood gases were conducted in addition to echocardiographic examinations. All investigations were done before and 3 days after treatment. There was no significant difference between all groups regarding efficacy of PDA closure ( P  = 0.868). There was a significant increase in serum creatinine levels and serum blood urea nitrogen (BUN) in the ibuprofen and indomethacin groups ( P  < 0.001). There was a significant reduction in platelet count and urine output (UOP) in both ibuprofen and indomethacin groups ( P  < 0.001). There was a significant increase in bilirubin levels in only the ibuprofen group ( P  = 0.003). No significant difference of hemoglobin (HB) level or liver enzymes in all groups ( P  > 0.05). Ventilatory settings improved significantly in patients with successful closure of PDA than those with failed PDA closure ( P  < 0.001). Conclusion : Paracetamol is as effective as indomethacin and ibuprofen in closure of PDA in preterm neonates and has less side effects mainly on renal function, platelet count, and GIT bleeding. What is Known: • Hemodynamically significant patent ductus arteriosus has many complications for preterm and low birth weight neonates and better to be closed. Many drugs were used for medical closure of PDA e.g. indomethacin, ibuprofen and recently paracetamol. Many studies compare safety and efficacy of paracetamol with either indomethacin or ibuprofen. What is New: • It is the first large study that compares the efficacy and side effects of the three drugs in one study.

Regular paracetamol is the recommended first-line analgesic for acute low-back pain; however, no high-quality evidence supports this recommendation. We aimed to assess the efficacy of paracetamol taken regularly or as-needed to improve time to recovery from pain, compared with placebo, in patients with low-back pain. We did a multicentre, double-dummy, randomised, placebo controlled trial across 235 primary care centres in Sydney, Australia, from Nov 11, 2009, to March 5, 2013. We randomly allocated patients with acute low-back pain in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive up to 4 weeks of regular doses of paracetamol (three times per day; equivalent to 3990 mg paracetamol per day), as-needed doses of paracetamol (taken when needed for pain relief; maximum 4000 mg paracetamol per day), or placebo. Randomisation was done according to a centralised randomisation schedule prepared by a researcher who was not involved in patient recruitment or data collection. Patients and staff at all sites were masked to treatment allocation. All participants received best-evidence advice and were followed up for 3 months. The primary outcome was time until recovery from low-back pain, with recovery defined as a pain score of 0 or 1 (on a 0–10 pain scale) sustained for 7 consecutive days. All data were analysed by intention to treat. This study is registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry, number ACTN 12609000966291. 550 participants were assigned to the regular group (550 analysed), 549 were assigned to the as-needed group (546 analysed), and 553 were assigned to the placebo group (547 analysed). Median time to recovery was 17 days (95% CI 14–19) in the regular group, 17 days (15–20) in the as-needed group, and 16 days (14–20) in the placebo group (regular vs placebo hazard ratio 0·99, 95% CI 0·87–1·14; as-needed vs placebo 1·05, 0·92–1·19; regular vs as-needed 1·05, 0·92–1·20). We recorded no difference between treatment groups for time to recovery (adjusted p=0·79). Adherence to regular tablets (median tablets consumed per participant per day of maximum 6; 4·0 [IQR 1·6–5·7] in the regular group, 3·9 [1·5–5·6] in the as-needed group, and 4·0 [1·5–5·7] in the placebo group), and number of participants reporting adverse events (99 [18·5%] in the regular group, 99 [18·7%] in the as-needed group, and 98 [18·5%] in the placebo group) were similar between groups. Our findings suggest that regular or as-needed dosing with paracetamol does not affect recovery time compared with placebo in low-back pain, and question the universal endorsement of paracetamol in this patient group. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and GlaxoSmithKline Australia.

ObjectiveAnaesthesiology guidelines suggest that opioids worsen obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) despite no randomised controlled trial evidence. We therefore conducted a randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effects of a common clinical dose of morphine on OSA, and to identify clinical phenotype and genotype vulnerability to opioid-respiratory depression.MethodsUnder a double-blind, randomised, crossover design, 60 male patients with OSA attended two visits to the hospital sleep laboratory, at least 1 week apart. Either 40 mg controlled-release oral morphine or placebo was administered. Awake ventilatory chemoreflex tests were performed post dose and prior to overnight polysomnography monitoring. Blood was sampled before sleep and the next morning for toxicology and genotype analyses. Sleep time with oxygen saturation (SpO2) <90% (T90) was the primary outcome.ResultsDespite a large inter-individual variability, 40 mg morphine did not worsen T90 and apnoea–hypopnoea index, and only decreased the SpO2 nadir by 1.3%. In patients with severe OSA, a lower baseline CO2ventilatory response threshold correlated with the worsening of T90, apnoea–hypopnoea index and oxygen desaturation index with morphine use. Patients with OSA and the A118G OPRM1 polymorphism of A/A and A/G had a significantly different morphine effect on awake ventilatory chemosensitivity and T90 during sleep.Conclusions40 mg oral controlled-release morphine did not worsen OSA in men, challenging traditional thinking that OSA will be worsened by opioids. Individual opioid response in patients with OSA may relate to baseline CO2 response threshold and OPRM1 genotype. Our study findings may pave the way for a precision medicine approach to avoid opioid-related risks.Trial registration numberThe Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry, ACTRN12613000858796.

Background To determine whether intermittent intravenous (IV) paracetamol as primary analgesic would significantly reduce morphine consumption in children aged 0–3 years after cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. Methods Multi-center, randomized, double-blinded, controlled trial in four level-3 Pediatric Intensive Care Units (PICU) in the Netherlands and Belgium. Inclusion period; March 2016–July 2020. Children aged 0–3 years, undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass were eligible. Patients were randomized to continuous morphine or intermittent IV paracetamol as primary analgesic after a loading dose of 100 mcg/kg morphine was administered at the end of surgery. Rescue morphine was given if numeric rating scale (NRS) pain scores exceeded predetermined cutoff values. Primary outcome was median weight-adjusted cumulative morphine dose in mcg/kg in the first 48 h postoperative. For the comparison of the primary outcome between groups, the nonparametric Van Elteren test with stratification by center was used. For comparison of the proportion of patients with one or more NRS pain scores of 4 and higher between the two groups, a non-inferiority analysis was performed using a non-inferiority margin of 20%. Results In total, 828 were screened and finally 208 patients were included; parents of 315 patients did not give consent and 305 were excluded for various reasons. Fourteen of the enrolled 208 children were withdrawn from the study before start of study medication leaving 194 patients for final analysis. One hundred and two patients received intermittent IV paracetamol, 106 received continuous morphine. The median weight-adjusted cumulative morphine consumption in the first 48 h postoperative in the IV paracetamol group was 5 times lower (79%) than that in the morphine group (median, 145.0 (IQR, 115.0–432.5) mcg/kg vs 692.6 (IQR, 532.7–856.1) mcg/kg; P  <  0.001 ). The rescue morphine consumption was similar between the groups (p = 0.38). Non-inferiority of IV paracetamol administration in terms of NRS pain scores was proven; difference in proportion − 3.1% (95% CI − 16.6–10.3%). Conclusions In children aged 0–3 years undergoing cardiac surgery, use of intermittent IV paracetamol reduces the median weight-adjusted cumulative morphine consumption in the first 48 h after surgery by 79% with equal pain relief showing equipoise for IV paracetamol as primary analgesic. Trial Registration Clinicaltrials.gov, Identifier: NCT05853263; EudraCT Number: 2015-001835-20.

This randomized, controlled trial shows that acetaminophen reduces kidney dysfunction and risk of developing acute kidney injury, particularly in severe malaria patients who present with high plasma hemoglobin, supporting the hypothesis that acetaminophen inhibits cell-free hemoglobin-mediated renal tubular oxidative damage. Abstract Background Acute kidney injury independently predicts mortality in falciparum malaria. It is unknown whether acetaminophen's capacity to inhibit plasma hemoglobin-mediated oxidation is renoprotective in severe malaria. Methods This phase 2, open-label, randomized controlled trial conducted at two hospitals in Bangladesh assessed effects on renal function, safety, pharmacokinetic (PK) properties and pharmacodynamic (PD) effects of acetaminophen. Febrile patients (>12 years) with severe falciparum malaria were randomly assigned to receive acetaminophen (1 g 6-hourly for 72 hours) or no acetaminophen, in addition to intravenous artesunate. Primary outcome was the proportional change in creatinine after 72 hours stratified by median plasma hemoglobin. Results Between 2012 and 2014, 62 patients were randomly assigned to receive acetaminophen (n = 31) or no acetaminophen (n = 31). Median (interquartile range) reduction in creatinine after 72 hours was 23% (37% to 18%) in patients assigned to acetaminophen, versus 14% (29% to 0%) in patients assigned to no acetaminophen (P = .043). This difference in reduction was 37% (48% to 22%) versus 14% (30% to −71%) in patients with hemoglobin ≥45000 ng/mL (P = .010). The proportion with progressing kidney injury was higher among controls (subdistribution hazard ratio, 3.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.1 to 8.5; P = .034). PK-PD analyses showed that higher exposure to acetaminophen increased the probability of creatinine improvement. No patient fulfilled Hy's law for hepatotoxicity. Conclusions In this proof-of-principle study, acetaminophen showed renoprotection without evidence of safety concerns in patients with severe falciparum malaria, particularly in those with prominent intravascular hemolysis. Clinical Trials Registration NCT01641289.

Background The combination of acetaminophen, codeine, and caffeine (Tylenol 3, T3) is a standard postoperative analgesia after breast surgery despite the adverse effects and variable efficacy of narcotics. This study compared the efficacy of a nonnarcotic approach (acetaminophen and ibuprofen; AcIBU) to T3 after outpatient breast surgery. Methods This double-blind randomized equivalence trial involved patients undergoing outpatient breast surgery. Patients were randomized (stratified by procedure type) to receive AcIBU or T3 four times daily for 7 days, or until free of pain. Pain intensity, measured four times daily by the visual analog scale, was the primary outcome; secondary outcomes were pain relief with analgesic, days until freedom from pain, adverse effects, discontinuation of drug as a result of adverse effects, and patient satisfaction. Results There were 71 patients randomized to AcIBU and 70 patients to T3. Repeated measures analysis showed no significant difference in average pain intensity over 7 days (AcIBU 19.9 mm vs. T3 20.6 mm; P  = 0.78). Similarly, there was no significant difference in pain relief with analgesic ( P  = 0.46). Although no difference in the incidence of adverse effects was observed ( P  = 0.94), discontinuation of the study drug as a result of adverse effects was more common with T3 (19 % vs. 6 %; P  = 0.018). No significant differences were identified in days until freedom from pain or patient satisfaction; 92 % of AcIBU and 89 % of T3 patients were satisfied with their pain control ( P  = 0.55). Conclusions AcIBU is a safe, effective method of pain control after outpatient breast surgery. Compared to T3, it provides at least equivalent analgesia and has a more tolerable adverse effect profile.

Abuse of prescription opioid medications has increased dramatically in the United States during the past decade, as indicated by a variety of epidemiological sources. However, few studies have systematically examined the relative reinforcing effects of commonly abused opioid medications. The current double-blind, placebo-controlled in-patient study was designed to compare the effects of intravenously delivered fentanyl (0, 0.0625, 0.125, 0.187, and 0.250 mg/70 kg), oxycodone (0, 6.25, 12.5, 25, and 50 mg/70 kg), morphine (0, 6.25, 12.5, 25, and 50 mg/70 kg), buprenorphine (0, 0.125, 0.5, 2, and 8 mg/70 kg), and heroin (0, 3.125, 6.25, 12.5, and 25 mg/70 kg) in morphine-maintained heroin abusers ( N =8 completers maintained on 120 mg per day oral morphine in divided doses (30 mg q.i.d.)). All of the participants received all of the drugs tested; drugs and doses were administered in non-systematic order. All of the drugs produced statistically significant, dose-related increases in positive subjective ratings, such as ‘I feel a good drug effect’ and ‘I like the drug.’ In general, the order of potency in producing these effects, from most to least potent, was fentanyl>buprenorphine⩾heroin >morphine=oxycodone. In contrast, buprenorphine was the only drug that produced statistically significant increases in ratings of ‘I feel a bad drug effect’ and it was the only drug that was not self-administered above placebo levels at any dose tested. These data suggest that the abuse liability of buprenorphine in heroin-dependent individuals may be low, despite the fact that it produces increases in positive subjective ratings. The abuse liabilities of fentanyl, morphine, oxycodone, and heroin, however, appear to be similar under these experimental conditions.

Recent warnings from Health Canada regarding codeine for children have led to increased use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and morphine for common injuries such as fractures. Our objective was to determine whether morphine administered orally has superior efficacy to ibuprofen in fracture-related pain. We used a parallel group, randomized, blinded superiority design. Children who presented to the emergency department with an uncomplicated extremity fracture were randomly assigned to receive either morphine (0.5 mg/kg orally) or ibuprofen (10 mg/kg) for 24 hours after discharge. Our primary outcome was the change in pain score using the Faces Pain Scale — Revised (FPS-R). Participants were asked to record pain scores immediately before and 30 minutes after receiving each dose. We analyzed data from 66 participants in the morphine group and 68 participants in the ibuprofen group. For both morphine and ibuprofen, we found a reduction in pain scores (mean pre–post difference ± standard deviation for dose 1: morphine 1.5 ± 1.2, ibuprofen 1.3 ± 1.0, between-group difference [δ] 0.2 [95% confidence interval (CI) −0.2 to 0.6]; dose 2: morphine 1.3 ± 1.3, ibuprofen 1.3 ± 0.9, δ 0 [95% CI −0.4 to 0.4]; dose 3: morphine 1.3 ± 1.4, ibuprofen 1.4 ± 1.1, δ −0.1 [95% CI −0.7 to 0.4]; and dose 4: morphine 1.5 ± 1.4, ibuprofen 1.1 ± 1.2, δ 0.4 [95% CI −0.2 to 1.1]). We found no significant differences in the change in pain scores between morphine and ibuprofen between groups at any of the 4 time points (p = 0.6). Participants in the morphine group had significantly more adverse effects than those in the ibuprofen group (56.1% v. 30.9%, p < 0.01). We found no significant difference in analgesic efficacy between orally administered morphine and ibuprofen. However, morphine was associated with a significantly greater number of adverse effects. Our results suggest that ibuprofen remains safe and effective for outpatient pain management in children with uncomplicated fractures. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT01690780.

The excruciating pain of patients with renal colic on presentation to the emergency department requires effective analgesia to be administered in the shortest possible time. Trials comparing intramuscular non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs with intravenous opioids or paracetamol have been inconclusive because of the challenges associated with concealment of randomisation, small sample size, differences in outcome measures, and inadequate masking of participants and assessors. We did this trial to develop definitive evidence regarding the choice of initial analgesia and route of administration in participants presenting with renal colic to the emergency department. In this three-treatment group, double-blind, randomised controlled trial, adult participants (aged 18–65 years) presenting to the emergency department of an academic, tertiary care hospital in Qatar, with moderate to severe renal colic (Numerical pain Rating Scale ≥4) were recruited. With the use of computer-generated block randomisation (block sizes of six and nine), participants were assigned (1:1:1) to receive diclofenac (75 mg/3 mL intramuscular), morphine (0·1 mg/kg intravenous), or paracetamol (1 g/100 mL intravenous). Participants, clinicians, and trial personnel were masked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants achieving at least a 50% reduction in initial pain score at 30 min after analgesia, assessed by intention-to-treat analysis and per-protocol analysis, which included patients where a calculus in the urinary tract was detected with imaging. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02187614. Between Aug 5, 2014, and March 15, 2015, we randomly assigned 1645 participants, of whom 1644 were included in the intention-to-treat analysis (547 in the diclofenac group, 548 in the paracetemol group, and 549 in the morphine group). Ureteric calculi were detected in 1316 patients, who were analysed as the per-protocol population (438 in the diclofenac group, 435 in the paracetemol group, and 443 in the morphine group). The primary outcome was achieved in 371 (68%) patients in the diclofenac group, 364 (66%) in the paracetamol group, and 335 (61%) in the morphine group in the intention-to-treat population. Compared to morphine, diclofenac was significantly more effective in achieving the primary outcome (odds ratio [OR] 1·35, 95% CI 1·05–1·73, p=0·0187), whereas no difference was detected in the effectiveness of morphine compared with intravenous paracetamol (1·26, 0·99–1·62, p=0·0629). In the per-protocol population, diclofenac (OR 1·49, 95% CI 1·13–1·97, p=0·0046) and paracetamol (1·40, 1·06–1·85, p=0·0166) were more effective than morphine in achieving the primary outcome. Acute adverse events in the morphine group occurred in 19 (3%) participants. Significantly lower numbers of adverse events were recorded in the diclofenac group (7 [1%] participants, OR 0·31, 95% CI 0·12–0·78, p=0·0088) and paracetamol group (7 [1%] participants, 0·36, 0·15–0·87, p=0·0175) than in the morphine group. During the 2 week follow-up, no additional adverse events were noted in any group. Intramuscular non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs offer the most effective sustained analgesia for renal colic in the emergency department and seem to have fewer side-effects. Hamad Medical Corporation Medical Research Center, Doha, Qatar.