ABSTRACT
Third molar extraction is a common procedure frequently accompanied by moderate or severe pain, and involves sufficient numbers of patients to make studies relatively easy to perform. The aim of the present study was to determine the efficacy and safety of the therapeutic combination of 10 mg piroxicam, 1 mg dexamethasone, 35 mg orphenadrine citrate, and 2.5 mg cyanocobalamin (Rheumazin) when compared with 20 mg piroxicam alone (Feldene) in mandibular third molar surgery. Eighty patients scheduled for removal of the third molar were included in this randomized and double-blind study. They received (vo) Rheumazin or Feldene 30 min after tooth extraction and once daily for 4 consecutive days. Pain was determined by a visual analogue scale and by the need for escape analgesia (paracetamol). Facial swelling was evaluated with a measuring tape and adverse effects and patient satisfaction were recorded. There was no statistically significant difference in facial swelling between Rheumazin and Feldene (control group). Both drugs were equally effective in the control of pain, with Rheumazin displaying less adverse effects than Feldene. Therefore, Rheumazin appears to provide a better risk/benefit ratio in the mandibular molar surgery. Since the side effects resulting from nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug administration are a severe limitation to the routine use of these drugs in clinical practice, our results suggest that Rheumazin can be a good choice for third molar removal treatment.
Subject(s)
Anti-Inflammatory Agents/administration & dosage , Molar, Third/surgery , Muscle Relaxants, Central/administration & dosage , Tooth Extraction , Vitamin B Complex/administration & dosage , Adolescent , Adult , Anti-Inflammatory Agents/adverse effects , Dexamethasone/administration & dosage , Dexamethasone/adverse effects , Double-Blind Method , Drug Therapy, Combination , Edema/prevention & control , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Muscle Relaxants, Central/adverse effects , Orphenadrine/administration & dosage , Orphenadrine/adverse effects , Pain Measurement , Pain, Postoperative/drug therapy , Piroxicam/administration & dosage , Piroxicam/adverse effects , Prospective Studies , Severity of Illness Index , Vitamin B 12/administration & dosage , Vitamin B 12/adverse effects , Vitamin B Complex/adverse effectsABSTRACT
Third molar extraction is a common procedure frequently accompanied by moderate or severe pain, and involves sufficient numbers of patients to make studies relatively easy to perform. The aim of the present study was to determine the efficacy and safety of the therapeutic combination of 10 mg piroxicam, 1 mg dexamethasone, 35 mg orphenadrine citrate, and 2.5 mg cyanocobalamin (Rheumazin®) when compared with 20 mg piroxicam alone (Feldene®) in mandibular third molar surgery. Eighty patients scheduled for removal of the third molar were included in this randomized and double-blind study. They received (vo) Rheumazin or Feldene 30 min after tooth extraction and once daily for 4 consecutive days. Pain was determined by a visual analogue scale and by the need for escape analgesia (paracetamol). Facial swelling was evaluated with a measuring tape and adverse effects and patient satisfaction were recorded. There was no statistically significant difference in facial swelling between Rheumazin and Feldene (control group). Both drugs were equally effective in the control of pain, with Rheumazin displaying less adverse effects than Feldene. Therefore, Rheumazin appears to provide a better risk/benefit ratio in the mandibular molar surgery. Since the side effects resulting from nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug administration are a severe limitation to the routine use of these drugs in clinical practice, our results suggest that Rheumazin can be a good choice for third molar removal treatment.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adolescent , Adult , Middle Aged , Dexamethasone/administration & dosage , Molar, Third/surgery , Orphenadrine/administration & dosage , Piroxicam/administration & dosage , Tooth Extraction , /administration & dosage , Anti-Inflammatory Agents/administration & dosage , Anti-Inflammatory Agents/adverse effects , Double-Blind Method , Drug Combinations , Dexamethasone/adverse effects , Edema/prevention & control , Muscle Relaxants, Central/administration & dosage , Muscle Relaxants, Central/adverse effects , Orphenadrine/adverse effects , Pain Measurement , Prospective Studies , Pain, Postoperative/drug therapy , Piroxicam/adverse effects , Severity of Illness Index , /adverse effects , Vitamin B Complex/administration & dosage , Vitamin B Complex/adverse effectsABSTRACT
Ninety-seven patients (44 males and 53 females of mean age 42.6 +/- 12,9 years) with orthopedic-traumatologic disorders (osteoarthritis, 38; painful joints, 26; fibrositis, painful shoulder, 20; peri- and extra-articular disorders, 13) had been treated during 7 to 30 days with two suppositories (400 mg) or three capsules (450 mg) proglumetacin (Proxil Rorer). Most patients responded well to very well to the treatment with significant improvement of pain and inflammatory symptoms as well as restoring of limited function. Such a response resulted proportional to the dose (53% of good responders among those given the lower dose and 82% among those at the higher dose) and to the kind of pathology. The patients with acute disorders (7) responded all very well in 7 days; those with subacute disorders (57) responded well to very well in a proportion of 57% within 15 days; those with chronic disorders responded to a proportion of 48% within 30 days. Tolerance resulted very good anyway: in no case had the treatment to be withdrawn, nor allergic or C.S.N. reactions were observed, so that the overall tolerance was defined excellent to good in 90% of patients. Thirty-three patients complained of accessory symptoms, mainly epigastric pain and nausea, almost always mild and anyway transient. Proglumetacin can therefore be properly defined as a firstchoice treatment for the management, also ambulatory, of orthopedic-traumatologic disorders.