Efficacy and safety of a fixed-dose combination of nimesulide/pantoprazole compared to naproxen/esomeprazole for pain relief in patients with osteoarticular diseases and dyspeptic symptoms.

PURPOSE: This study investigated the safety and efficacy of fixed-dose combination tablets of naproxen/esomeprazole magnesium and nimesulide/pantoprazole to determine if both regimens are equally suited to relieve pain in patients with osteoarticular diseases and dyspeptic symptoms. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either nimesulide/pantoprazole (100 mg/20 mg) twice daily or naproxen/esomeprazole magnesium (500 mg/20 mg) twice daily for 14 days. The primary endpoint was defined as the mean change in modified Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index pain subscale. Secondary endpoints were mean visual analog scale score of dyspeptic symptoms (nausea, abdominal discomfort/pain, epigastric burning, postprandial fullness), mean visual analog scale score of individual dyspeptic symptoms, and individual score of dyspeptic symptoms according to patient diary. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01670552. RESULTS: A total of 490 patients were enrolled and randomized, and 399 completed treatment (naproxen/esomeprazole, n=201; nimesulide/pantoprazole, n=198). The difference in mean change in the modified Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index pain score after 7 days of treatment between the two treatment groups was 2.33 mm (95% CI, -1.22 to 5.89 mm). After 14 days of therapy, the difference was 0.45 mm (95% CI, -3.29 to 4.19 mm). The most common adverse events in the pooled group were abdominal discomfort, abdominal distention, dyspepsia, and nausea, but none of these was deemed to be clinically meaningful. CONCLUSION: The present study demonstrated noninferiority of a 14-day regimen with a fixed-dose combination of nimesulide/pantoprazole compared to naproxen/esomeprazole for the treatment of osteoarticular pain.

Double-blind, randomized, double-dummy clinical trial comparing the efficacy of ketorolac trometamol and naproxen for acute low back pain.

BACKGROUND: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are the most common type of medication used in the treatment of acute pain. Ketorolac trometamol (KT) is a nonnarcotic, peripherally acting nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug with analgesic effects comparable to certain opioids. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of KT and naproxen (NA) in the treatment of acute low back pain (LBP) of moderate-to-severe intensity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this 10-day, Phase III, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, noninferiority trial, participants with acute LBP of moderate-to-severe intensity as determined through a visual analog scale (VAS) were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive sublingual KT 10 mg three times daily or oral NA 250 mg three times daily. From the second to the fifth day of treatment, if patient had VAS >40 mm, increased dosage to four times per day was allowed. The primary end point was the reduction in LBP as measured by VAS. We also performed a post hoc superiority analysis. RESULTS: KT was not inferior to NA for the reduction in LBP over 5 days of use as measured by VAS scores (P=0.608 for equality of variance; P=0.321 for equality of means) and by the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (P=0.180 for equality of variance test; P=0.446 for equality of means) using 95% confidence intervals. The percentage of participants with improved pain relief 60 minutes after receiving the first dose was higher in the KT group (24.2%) than in the NA group (6.5%; P=0.049). The most common adverse effects were heartburn, nausea, and vomiting. CONCLUSION: KT is not inferior in efficacy and delivers faster pain relief than NA.

Quantitative real-time PCR for the clinical detection of Helicobacter pylori

Accurate diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection is very important in both clinical practice and research. We evaluated the sensitivity of real-time PCR (RT-PCR) for the detection and quantification of Helicobacter pylori using DNA from 91 human gastric biopsy samples divided into three groups: 46 biopsies from untreated patients who according to the references methods were considered H. pylori-negative (group A); 35 biopsies from patients previously treated against H. pylori and considered to be cured by "gold standard" tests (group B); and 10 biopsies from patients H. pylori-positive by all available methods (group C). The sensitivity of the RT-PCR assay was higher than that of standard methods. Of the 81 patients considered to be uninfected according to the references methods, 16 were H. pylori-positive by PCR, 10 of which were patients who had received H. pylori eradication therapy and 6 were untreated patients. Based on these findings we recommend that RT-PCR should be use in addition to standard methods in clinical studies to monitor the results of H. pylori eradication therapy.

The influence of endoscopic procedures upon the contamination of Helicobacter pylori cultures.

BACKGROUND: Among the various diagnostic methods for the detection of Helicobacter pylori infection, histological examination and microbiological processing of gastric biopsy samples are assumed to be the gold standard techniques. AIMS: Since H. pylori culture can be affected by the presence of non-H. pylori bacteria, we evaluated the efficacy of endoscope disinfection and the influence of endoscopic procedures on culture contamination. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The procedures used during the first two routine endoscopies were evaluated during 28 consecutive days. Endoscopy room, forceps and endoscopic channel were analyzed before and after the beginning of normal procedures. After disinfection, a biopsy simulation was performed to verify the gastric bacteria. RESULTS: Endoscope disinfection removed all organisms from forceps and endoscopic channel with 100% efficacy. The most frequent non-H. pylori bacteria detected were Streptococcus bovis, Enterobacter hormaechei, and Staphylococcus aureus. The sensibility of the H. pylori culture was affected by the presence of non-H. pylori bacteria. CONCLUSION: The risk of transmission of microorganisms was not detectable when sterilized biopsy forceps and stringent disinfection standards were employed. Whilst S. bovis and E. hormaechei may be common in gastric microbial flora, the presence of P. aeruginosa and S. aureus indicated that the manipulation of biopsies could be responsible for culture contamination with these bacteria.

The influence of endoscopic procedures upon the contamination of Helicobacter pylori cultures

RACIONAL E OBJETIVOS: Dentre os vários métodos diagnósticos empregados na detecção da infecção por Helicobacter pylori, o diagnóstico histológico e a análise microbiológica de biopsia gástrica são consideradas as técnicas mais sensíveis. Entretanto, a sensibilidade da cultura de H. pylori pode ser reduzida pela presença de outras bactérias. Desse modo, avaliou-se a eficácia da desinfecção do endoscópio e a influência dos procedimentos endoscópicos na contaminação da cultura bacteriana. Para tal, as duas primeiras endoscopias durante 28 dias consecutivos foram estudadas. A sala de endoscopia, o fórceps e o canal do endoscópio foram analisados antes e depois do início dos procedimentos endoscópicos rotineiros. Depois da desinfecção, uma simulação de coleta de biopsia foi realizada para verificar a presença das bactérias gástricas. RESULTADOS: A desinfecção do endoscópio foi capaz de remover todos os organismos do fórceps e do canal do endoscópio. As bactérias não-H. pylori mais freqüentemente detectadas foram Streptococcus bovis, Enterobacter hormaechei e Staphylococcus aureus. Em alguns casos a sensibilidade da cultura do H. pylori foi reduzida pela presença de bactérias contaminantes. CONCLUSAO: Não houve risco de transmissão de microorganismos quando fórceps esterilizados e desinfecção adequada foram empregadas. A presença de S. bovis e E. hormaechei parece ser comum na microflora gástrica; por outro lado, a detecção de P. aeruginosa e S. aureus indica que a manipulação de biopsias pode ser responsável pela contaminação da cultura por essas bactérias.