47
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Therapeutic Approaches for Renal Colic in the Emergency Department: A Review Article

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Context:

          Renal colic is frequently described as the worst pain ever experienced, and management of this intense pain is necessary. The object of our review was to discuss different approaches of pain control for patients with acute renal colic in the emergency department.

          Evidence Acquisition:

          Studies that discussed the treatment of renal colic pain were included in this review. We collected articles from reputable internet databases.

          Results:

          Our study showed that some new treatment approaches, such as the use of lidocaine or nerve blocks, can be used to control the severe and persistent pain of renal colic.

          Conclusions:

          Some new approaches are discussed and their impact on renal colic pain control was compared with traditional therapies. The effectiveness of the new approaches in this review is similar or even better than in traditional treatments.

          Related collections

          Most cited references62

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Variability among nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs in risk of upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

          Traditional nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) increase the risk of upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding/perforation, but the magnitude of this effect for coxibs in the general population and the degree of variability between individual NSAIDs is still under debate. This study was undertaken to assess the risk of upper GI bleeding/perforation among users of individual NSAIDs and to analyze the correlation between this risk and the degree of inhibition of whole blood cyclooxygenase 1 (COX-1) and COX-2 in vitro. We conducted a systematic review of observational studies on NSAIDs and upper GI bleeding/perforation published between 2000 and 2008. We calculated pooled relative risk (RR) estimates of upper GI bleeding/perforation for individual NSAIDs. Additionally, we verified whether the degree of inhibition of whole blood COX-1 and COX-2 in vitro by average circulating concentrations predicted the RR of upper GI bleeding/perforation. The RR of upper GI bleeding/perforation was 4.50 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 3.82-5.31) for traditional NSAIDs and 1.88 (95% CI 0.96-3.71) for coxibs. RRs lower than that for NSAIDs overall were observed for ibuprofen (2.69 [95% CI 2.17-3.33]), rofecoxib (2.12 [95% CI 1.59-2.84]), aceclofenac (1.44 [95% CI 0.65-3.2]), and celecoxib (1.42 [95% CI 0.85-2.37]), while higher RRs were observed for ketorolac (14.54 [95% CI 5.87-36.04]) and piroxicam (9.94 [95% CI 5.99-16.50). Estimated RRs were 5.63 (95% CI 3.83-8.28) for naproxen, 5.57 (95% CI 3.94-7.87) for ketoprofen, 5.40 (95% CI 4.16-7.00) for indomethacin, 4.15 (95% CI 2.59-6.64) for meloxicam, and 3.98 (95% CI 3.36-4.72) for diclofenac. The degree of inhibition of whole blood COX-1 did not significantly correlate with RR of upper GI bleeding/perforation associated with individual NSAIDs (r(2) = 0.34, P = 0.058), but a profound and coincident inhibition (>80%) of both COX isozymes was associated with higher risk. NSAIDs with a long plasma half-life and with a slow-release formulation were associated with a greater risk than NSAIDs with a short half-life. The results of our analysis demonstrate that risk of upper GI bleeding/perforation varies between individual NSAIDs at the doses commonly used in the general population. Drugs that have a long half-life or slow-release formulation and/or are associated with profound and coincident inhibition of both COX isozymes are associated with a greater risk of upper GI bleeding/perforation.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Systematic review of the relative efficacy of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and opioids in the treatment of acute renal colic.

            To examine the relative benefits and disadvantages of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opioids for the management of acute renal colic. Cochrane Renal Group's specialised register, Cochrane central register of controlled trials, Medline, Embase, and reference lists of retrieved articles. Randomised controlled trials comparing any opioid with any NSAID in acute renal colic if they reported any of the following outcomes: patient rated pain, time to pain relief, need for rescue analgesia, rate of recurrence of pain, and adverse events. 20 trials totalling 1613 participants were identified. Both NSAIDs and opioids led to clinically important reductions in patient reported pain scores. Pooled analysis of six trials showed a greater reduction in pain scores for patients treated with NSAIDs than with opioids. Patients treated with NSAIDs were significantly less likely to require rescue analgesia (relative risk 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.61 to 0.93). Most trials showed a higher incidence of adverse events in patients treated with opioids. Compared with patients treated with opioids, those treated with NSAIDs had significantly less vomiting (0.35, 0.23 to 0.53). Pethidine was associated with a higher rate of vomiting. Patients receiving NSAIDs achieve greater reductions in pain scores and are less likely to require further analgesia in the short term than those receiving opioids. Opioids, particularly pethidine, are associated with a higher rate of vomiting.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Randomized trial of the efficacy of tamsulosin, nifedipine and phloroglucinol in medical expulsive therapy for distal ureteral calculi.

              Recent studies show the interesting efficacy of different drug combinations for the spontaneous expulsion of distal ureteral stones. We performed a randomized, prospective study to assess and compare the efficacy of 3 drugs as medical expulsive therapy for distal ureteral calculi. A total of 210 symptomatic patients with distal ureteral calculi greater than 4 mm were randomly allocated to home treatment with phloroglucinol, tamsulosin or nifedipine (groups 1 to 3, respectively). Each group was given a corticosteroid drug and antibiotic prophylaxis with an injectable nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug was also used on demand. The primary end point was the expulsion rate and the secondary end points were expulsion time, analgesic use, need for hospitalization and endoscopic treatment as well as the number of workdays lost, quality of life and drug side effects The expulsion rate was significantly higher in group 2 (97.1%) than in groups 1 (64.3%, p <0.0001) or 3 (77.1%, p <0.0001). Group 2 significantly achieved stone passage in a shorter time than the other 2 groups and showed a significantly decreased number of hospitalizations as well as a better decrease in endoscopic procedures performed to remove the stone. The control of renal colic pain was significantly superior in group 2 compared with the other groups, resulting in fewer workdays lost. Group 3 showed lower analgesic use and decreased workdays lost compared with group 1. No difference in side effects was observed among the groups. Medical expulsive therapy should be considered for distal ureterolithiasis without complications before ureteroscopy or extracorporeal lithotripsy. The use of tamsulosin in this treatment regimen produced stone expulsion in almost all cases in a short time, allowing complete home patient treatment.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Anesth Pain Med
                Anesth Pain Med
                10.5812/aapm
                Kowsar
                Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
                Kowsar
                2228-7523
                2228-7531
                13 February 2014
                February 2014
                : 4
                : 1
                : e16222
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Medical Philosophy and History Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
                [2 ]Cardiovascular Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
                [3 ]Emergency Medicine Department, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
                [4 ]Students Research Committee, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
                [5 ]Anesthesiology and Critical Care Department, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author: Hassan Soleimanpour, Cardiovascular Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran. Tel: +989141164134, Fax: +984113352078, E-mail: soleimanpourh@ 123456tbzmed.ac.ir
                Article
                10.5812/aapm.16222
                3961032
                24701420
                4a2aba61-ab30-42df-a4c0-96ea36737f8d
                Copyright © 2014, Iranian Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine (ISRAPM)

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 17 November 2013
                : 08 December 2013
                : 16 December 2013
                Categories
                Review Article

                renal colic,lidocaine,nerve block,emergency department
                renal colic, lidocaine, nerve block, emergency department

                Comments

                Comment on this article