Acute backpain: analgesic selection


Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

Acute low back pain (LBP) - a common pathological condition associated with a high incidence of temporary disability. LBP - a benign condition requiring a detailed instrumental assessment only in the presence of symptoms, suggested the secondary nature of pain. An important task is pain relief in patients with LBP. NSAIDs, including meloxicam (Movalis) can be used for this reason. The data for drug efficacy in various pain syndromes are presented. We have observed good tolerability and low risk of gastrointestinal complications. Given the current data we discuss the problem of low risk of atherothrombotic complications in Movalis administration.

References

  1. Low Back pain initiavite, WHO 1999:4.
  2. Carey T, Evans A, Hadler N, et al. Acute severe low back pain. A population-based study of prevalence and care-seeking. Spine 1996;21:339-44.
  3. Luo X, Pietrobon R, Sun S, et al. Estimates and patterns of direct health care expenditures among individuals with back pain in the United States. Spine 2004;29:79-86.
  4. Chou R, Qaseem A, Snow V, et al. Diagnosis and Treatment of Low Back Pain: A Joint Clinical Practice Guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Pain Society. Ann Intern Med 2007;147:478-91.
  5. Royal College of General Practitioners. Clinical Guidelines for the Management of Acute Low Back Pain. London, Royal College of General Practitioners, 1996 and 1999.
  6. Waddell G. The Back Pain Revolution ed. by G. Waddell. 2nd ed. Elsevier Edinburgh 2004;221-39.
  7. Jellema P, van Tulder M, van Poppel M, et al. Lumbar supports for prevention and treatment of low back pain: a systematic review within the framework of the Cochrane Back Review Group. Spine 2001;26:377-86.
  8. Никифоров А.С., Коновалов А.Н., Гусев Е.И. Клиническая неврология. В 3-х томах. М., 2002.
  9. Pengel L, Herbert R, Maher C, et al. Acute low back pain: systematic review of its prognosis. BMJ 2003;327:323-26.
  10. Acute low back pain: a new paradigm for management. Editorials. BMJ 1996;313:1343-44.
  11. Gilbert F, Grant A, Gillan M, et al. Scottish Back Trial Group. Low back pain: influence of early MR imaging or CT on treatment and outcome - multicenter randomized trial. Radiology 2004;231:343-51.
  12. Weinstein J, Lurie J, Tosteson T, et al. Surgical versus nonsurgical treatment for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. N Engl J Med 2007;356:2257-70.
  13. Hagen K, Jamtvedt G, Hilde G, et al. Bed rest bad for back pain, ineffective for sciatica. The updated Cochrane Review of bed rest for low back pain and sciatica. Spine 2005;30:542-46.
  14. van Tuder M, Becker A, Bekkering T, et al. European guidelines for the management of acute nonspecific low back pain in primary care. Eur Spine J 2006;15(Suppl. 2):S169-S191.
  15. van Tulder M. Low back pain (chronic). Clin Evid 2004;12:1657-82.
  16. Насонов Е.Л. Противовоспалительная терапия ревматических болезней. М., 1996. 345c .
  17. Goei The H, Lund B, Distel M, <file:///sitesentrez?Db=pubmed&Cmd=Search&Term=%22Bluhmki%20E%22%5BAuthor%5D&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbstractPlusDrugs1>et al. A double-blind, randomized trial to compare meloxicam 15 mg with diclofenac 100 mg in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 1997;5(4):283-88.
  18. Lund B, Distel M, Bluhmki E. A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study of efficacy and tolerance of meloxicam treatment in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. Scand J Rheumatol 1998;27(1):32-37.
  19. Linden B, Distel M, Bluhmki E. A double-blind study to compare the efficacy and safety of meloxicam 15 mg with piroxicam 20 mg in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip. Br J Rheumatol 1996;35(Suppl. 1):35-38.
  20. Reginster J, Distel M, Bluhmki E. A double-blind, three-week study to compare the efficacy and safety of meloxicam 7.5 mg and meloxicam 15 mg in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Br J Rheumatol 1996;35(Suppl. 1):17-21.
  21. Valat J, Accardo S, Reginster J, et al. A comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of meloxicam and diclofenac in the treatment of patients with osteoarthritis of the lumbar spine. Inflamm Res. Inflamm Res 2001;50(Suppl. 1):S30-34.
  22. Dreiser R, Le Parc J, Velicitat P, et al. Oral meloxicam is effective in acute sciatica: two randomised, double-blind trials versus placebo or diclofenac. Inflamm Res 2001;50(Suppl. 1):S17-23.
  23. Colberg K., Hettich M., Sigmund R, et al. The efficacy and tolerability of an 8-day administration of intravenous and oral meloxicam: a comparison with intramuscular and oral diclofenac in patients with acute lumbago. German Meloxicam Ampoule Study Group. Curr Med Res Opin 1996;13(7):363-77.
  24. Wojtulewski J, Schattenkirchner M, Barcelo P, et al. A six-month double-blind trial to compare the efficacy and safety of meloxicam 7,5 mg daily and naproxen 750 mg daily in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Br J Rheumatol 1996;35(Suppl. 1):22-28.
  25. Hawkey C, Kahan A, Steinbruck K, et al. Gastrointestinal tolerability of meloxicam compared diclofenac in osteoarthritis patients. International MELISSA Study Group. Meloxicam Large-scale International Study Safety Assessment. Rheumatology (Oxford) 1999;38(8):793-945.
  26. Colberg K, Hettich M, Sigmund R, et al. The efficacy and tolerability of an 8-day administration of intravenous and oral meloxicam: a comparison with intramuscular and oral diclofenac in patients with acute lumbago. German Meloxicam Ampoule Study Group. Curr Med Res Opin 1996;13(7):363-77.
  27. Carrabba M, Paresce E, Angelini M, et al. <file:///sitesentrez?Db=pubmed&Cmd=Search&Term=%22Galanti%20A%22%5BAuthor%5D&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbstractPlusDrugs1>A comparison of the local tolerability, safety and efficacy of meloxicam and piroxicam suppositories in patients with osteoarthritis: a single-blind, randomized, multicentre study. Curr Med Res Opin 1995;13(6):343-55.
  28. Ruperto N, Nikishina I, Pachanov E, et al. A randomized, double-blind clinical trial of two doses of meloxicam compared with naproxen in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis: short- and long-term efficacy and safety results. Arthritis Rheum 2005;52(2):563-72.
  29. Senna G, Bilo M, Antonicelli L, et al. Tolerability of three selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors, meloxicam, celecoxib and rofecoxib in NSAID-sensitive patients. Allerg Immunol (Paris) 2004;36(6):215-18.
  30. Caldwell B, Aldington S, Shirtcliffe P, et al. Risk of cardiovascular events and celecoxib: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J R Soc Med 2006;99:132-40.
  31. Hagen K, Jamtvedt G, Hilde G, et al. Bed rest bad for back pain, ineffective for sciatica. The updated Cochrane Review of bed rest for low back pain and sciatica. Spine 2005;30:542-46.
  32. Roumie C, Mitchel E, Kaltenbach L, et al. Nonaspirin NSAIDs, cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitors, and the risk for stroke. Stroke 2008;39:7:2037-45.
  33. Tavakoli M. Modelling therapeutic strategies in the treatment of osteoarthritis: an economic evaluation of meloxicam versus diclofenac and piroxicam. Pharmacoeconomics 2003;21(6):443-54.
  34. Van Ryn J, Kink-Eiband M, Kuritsch I, et al. <file:///sitesentrez?Db=pubmed&Cmd=Search&Term=%22Feifel%20U%22%5BAuthor%5D&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVAbstractPlusDrugs1>Meloxicam does not affect the antiplatelet effect of aspirin in healthy male and female volunteers. J Clin Pharmacol 2004;44(7):777-84.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Copyright (c) 2009 Bionika Media

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies