RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Nimesulide is a nonsteroidal, anti-inflammatory drug that hasbeen used for a wide range of acute and chronic pain. A once-daily formulation of nimesulide is now commercially available, but its effectiveness in pain management after dental surgery has not been assessed. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the analgesic effectiveness and tolerability of oral treatment with once-daily nimesulide versus ibuprofen q6h over 24 hours in patients with postoperative pain associated with surgical extraction of an impacted third molar. METHODS: This 24-hour, double-blind, randomized, double-dummy, parallel-groupstudy was conducted at a private practice in Caracas, Venezuela. Patients aged between 12 and 60 years with moderate to severe pain after extraction of an impacted third molar were enrolled. Patients were randomized to receive a single dose of nimesulide (300-mg tablet) or ibuprofen (400-mg tablets) q6h for 24 hours. For double-dummy design, patients in the nimesulide group also received ibuprofen placebo tablets, to be taken q6h for 24 hours, and patients in the ibuprofen group received a nimesulide placebo tablet. The primary end points were pain intensity (PI) and pain relief scores over 24 hours. Secondary end points included total pain relief, PI difference (PID), sum of PID (SPID), time to first measurable change in PI (ie, PID ≥ 10 mm), and use of rescue medication (acetaminophen). Patients also rated the treatment's effectiveness as very poor to very good on questioning by the study investigator. Spontaneously reported adverse effects (AEs) were recorded. RESULTS: Eighty-six patients were enrolled (56 females, 30 males), with 43 patientsper treatment group (mean age: nimesulide group, 25.2 years; ibuprofen group, 24.2 years). The baseline characteristics were statistically similar between the 2 groups. Compared with baseline, mean PI scores were significantly lower in both treatment groups at all time points throughout the study (P < 0.001). Mean PI scores were significantly lower in the nimesulide group compared with the ibuprofen group at 15 and 45 minutes and 1 hour after study drug administration (P ≤ 0.049). Time to first measurable change in PI was within the first 15 minutes in 22 patients (52%) in the nimesulide group and in 14 patients (33%) in the ibuprofen group (P = 0.03). Analgesia lasted 24 hours with nimesulide and ibuprofen (PI scores at 24 hours, 9.4 and 3.6, respectively). The mean PR score was significantly lower in the nimesulide group compared with the ibuprofen group at 1 hour after study drug administration (P = 0.049). Compared with baseline, PID and SPID were significantly higher in both treatment groups throughout the study (P < 0.001). Significantly more patients in the nimesulide group than in the ibuprofen group reported that treatment provided effective pain relief (82% vs 73%; P = 0.013). No AEs were reported in either treatment group throughout the study. Use of rescue medication was statistically similar between the nimesulide and ibuprofen groups (38% and 31%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In this study of patients with moderate to severe pain afterextraction of impacted third molars, nimesulide and ibuprofen provided effective 24-hour relief. However, the results suggest that the analgesic effect of nimesulide had a faster onset (<15 minutes) and was stronger (based on patient opinion) than that of ibuprofen. Both study drugs were well tolerated.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Pain following extraction of an impacted third molar is widely used to assess analgesic efficacy, especially that of a single dose of a drug. The analgesic activity of conventional nimesulide (CN) has been documented in a variety of types of acute and chronic pain. Beta-cyclodextrin nimesulide (BN) is a new formulation in which nimesulide is included in a cyclodextrin molecule, which increases its solubility in water and its dilution rate, allowing extended, rapid absorption of the drug. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and tolerability of a single dose of BN compared with CN in patients with pain following extraction of an impacted third molar. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy study conducted at 3 dentistry centers in Venezuela. The patients were randomized to 1 of 2 groups. One group received a single dose of BN (400-mg tablet, equivalent to 100 mg of nimesulide); the other group received a single dose of CN (100-mg tablet). Both groups also received a placebo. The efficacy variables were (1) pain intensity (PI), assessed on a visual analog scale (VAS) at the following times: 0, 5, 10, 15, 30, and 45 minutes and 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 hours after drug administration; (2) time to first measurable difference in PI from baseline (PID) (PID ≥1 cm on the VAS; ie, the beginning of analgesic action); (3) maximum PID (max PID); (4) sum of PIDs in the 12-hour observation period; (5) pain relief (PR), as rated on a 5-point scale; (6) maximum PR; and (7) sum of the PR scores in the 12-hour observation period (ie, total PR). For the tolerability analysis, all adverse events (AEs) were to be recorded, and the investigators were to assess whether each AE was drug related. RESULTS: Seventy-two patients were enrolled in the study. Of these, 62 patients (40 women, 22 men; mean [SD] age, 20.1 [5.9] years) were assessed; 35 were treated with BN and 27 with CN. PI reduction was more rapid and greater in the BN group. The first measurable change in PI (PID ≥1 on the VAS) was reached within 5 minutes by 39% and 15% of the patients in the BN and CN groups, respectively, and within 10 minutes by 52% and 30% of the patients in the BN and CN groups, respectively. The max PID was reached <1 hour in 32% and 15% of patients in the BN and CN groups, respectively. No AEs were reported. CONCLUSIONS: In this study population, both BN and CN were similarly effective in relieving pain after extraction of an impacted third molar, and both drugs were well tolerated. PI changes were statistically significantly more rapid and greater with BN than CN.
