AIMS: To determine the comparative efficacy of a new novel adenosine agonist (WAG 994) in postoperative pain after third molar surgery. METHODS:One hundred and twenty-two patients with postoperative pain after third molar surgery were randomised in a placebo double-blind trial with an active control group. In the early postoperative period patients received either a single dose of WAG 994 1 mg, ibuprofen 400 mg or matched placebos. Pain intensity score was recorded on serial visual analogue scales over a 6 h investigation period. Similarly, pain relief was completed on a 4 point categorical scale at each evaluation point. Patients had access to escape analgesic and if these were taken, the time and dosage were recorded. A sparse sampling technique was used to investigate the relationship between analgesic effects and plasma concentrations of WAG 994. RESULTS: All three treatment groups were matched for various demographic variables. For all efficacy measures, WAG 994 was not significantly different from placebo (P >0.05), whereas ibuprofen 400 mg was significantly superior to placebo (P<0.001). No significant relationships (P<0.05) were found between WAG 994 pharmacokinetic variables and efficacy measures. Conclusion WAG 994, an adenosine agonist, did not show efficacy in the management of postoperative pain after third molar surgery. Although this pain responds well to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, it appears to be resistant to compounds that interact with purinergic receptors.
RCT Entities:
AIMS: To determine the comparative efficacy of a new novel adenosine agonist (WAG 994) in postoperative pain after third molar surgery. METHODS: One hundred and twenty-two patients with postoperative pain after third molar surgery were randomised in a placebo double-blind trial with an active control group. In the early postoperative period patients received either a single dose of WAG 994 1 mg, ibuprofen 400 mg or matched placebos. Pain intensity score was recorded on serial visual analogue scales over a 6 h investigation period. Similarly, pain relief was completed on a 4 point categorical scale at each evaluation point. Patients had access to escape analgesic and if these were taken, the time and dosage were recorded. A sparse sampling technique was used to investigate the relationship between analgesic effects and plasma concentrations of WAG 994. RESULTS: All three treatment groups were matched for various demographic variables. For all efficacy measures, WAG 994 was not significantly different from placebo (P >0.05), whereas ibuprofen 400 mg was significantly superior to placebo (P<0.001). No significant relationships (P<0.05) were found between WAG 994 pharmacokinetic variables and efficacy measures. Conclusion WAG 994, an adenosine agonist, did not show efficacy in the management of postoperative pain after third molar surgery. Although this pain responds well to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, it appears to be resistant to compounds that interact with purinergic receptors.