Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Opioid Manag ; 15(2): 147-158, 2019.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31343716

ABSTRACT

Transdermal buprenorphine (TDB) has demonstrated effectiveness in treating a range of chronic pain conditions, including cancer pain, nociceptive pain, and neuropathic pain and has a favorable safety profile. Worldwide, clinical experience of its use is relatively limited. There is considerable misunderstanding about the pharmacology, mechanism of action, and safety of buprenorphine. There is also limited guidance on the appropriate use of TDB for chronic pain management. This article presents an overview of TDB and also provides practical recommendations for its use as part of a multifaceted strategy in chronic cancer and non-cancer pain.


Subject(s)
Analgesics, Opioid/administration & dosage , Buprenorphine/administration & dosage , Chronic Pain , Neoplasms/complications , Analgesics, Opioid/therapeutic use , Buprenorphine/therapeutic use , Chronic Pain/drug therapy , Chronic Pain/etiology , Humans , Pain Management , Pain Measurement , Transdermal Patch
2.
Pain Ther ; 8(1): 19-39, 2019 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31004317

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Optimal pain management is crucial to the postoperative recovery process. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravenous oxycodone with intravenous fentanyl, morphine, sufentanil, pethidine, and hydromorphone for acute postoperative pain. METHODS: A systematic literature search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases was performed for randomized controlled trials published from 2008 through 2017 (inclusive) that evaluated the acute postoperative analgesic efficacy of intravenous oxycodone against fentanyl, morphine, sufentanil, pethidine, and hydromorphone in adult patients (age ≥ 18 years). Outcomes examined included analgesic consumption, pain intensity levels, side effects, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: Eleven studies were included in the review; six compared oxycodone with fentanyl, two compared oxycodone with morphine, and three compared oxycodone with sufentanil. There were no eligible studies comparing oxycodone with pethidine or hydromorphone. Overall, analgesic consumption was lower with oxycodone than with fentanyl or sufentanil. Oxycodone exhibited better analgesic efficacy than fentanyl and sufentanil, and comparable analgesic efficacy to morphine. In terms of safety, there was a tendency towards more side effects with oxycodone than with fentanyl, but the incidence of side effects with oxycodone was comparable to morphine and sufentanil. Where patient satisfaction was evaluated, higher satisfaction levels were observed with oxycodone than with sufentanil and comparable satisfaction was noted when comparing oxycodone with fentanyl. Patient satisfaction was not evaluated in the studies comparing oxycodone with morphine. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that intravenous oxycodone provides better analgesic efficacy than fentanyl and sufentanil, and comparable efficacy to morphine with less adverse events such as sedation. No studies comparing intravenous oxycodone with pethidine or hydromorphone were identified in this review. Better alignment of study methodologies for future research in this area is recommended to provide the best evidence base for a meta-analysis. FUNDING: Mundipharma Singapore Holding Pte Ltd, Singapore.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...