BACKGROUND: Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), including diclofenac, are the mainstay of analgesic and anti-inflammatory treatment in dentistry. Diclofenac epolamine [diclofenac N-(2-hydroxyethyl)pyrrolidine; DHEP] is a diclofenac salt with greater water solubility and better cutaneous absorption properties than other commonly used forms of the drug. IBSA has recently developed a mouthwash formulation of DHEP for the topical treatment of inflammatory conditions of the oral cavity. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of DHEP mouthwash (Osmal®) with that of a reference product (commercially available diclofenac mouthwash). METHODS: This was a randomized, investigator-blind, parallel-group, controlled, phase III study that enrolled 80 patients with conditions affecting the oral cavity, characterized by an inflammatory component, and eligible for analgesic and anti-inflammatory treatment. Patients were randomized 1:1 to DHEP mouthwash (0.103% DHEP in aqueous solution) or to diclofenac mouthwash (0.074% free diclofenac in aqueous solution). The treatment regimen was the same in both groups: 1-minute rinse with 15 mL of mouthwash, twice daily for 7 days. Visits were scheduled at study inclusion (D0), and 3 days (D3) and 7 days (D7) after treatment initiation. During each visit assessments were made of pain severity (using a 5-point semi-quantitative scale and a 100-mm visual analogue scale [VAS]) and inflammatory signs (using a 5-point scale). The primary study endpoint was the change in pain severity scores from D0 to D3 and D7. Secondary endpoints included effects of treatment on inflammation score, quality of sleep, compliance with treatment and the safety and tolerability of treatment. RESULTS: The two treatment arms were homogeneous in terms of patient characteristics. The most prevalent oral condition was gingivitis. Overall both topical treatments were effective in alleviating pain and inflammation, as evidenced by decreases in pain and inflammation scores within 3 days after treatment initiation. Notably, a significantly greater proportion of patients treated with DHEP were free of pain and inflammatory symptoms at D3 compared with those treated with the diclofenac mouthwash (40% vs 20% of patients; p < 0.05). Also, DHEP was associated with more marked, but not statistically significant, decreases in VAS pain scores versus baseline after 3 days' treatment. Compliance with both treatments was good and both mouthwashes were well tolerated. CONCLUSION:DHEP mouthwash was at least as effective as diclofenac mouthwash at alleviating pain and inflammation symptoms and is well tolerated in patients with painful inflammatory conditions of the oral cavity. The potential of DHEP mouthwash deserves to be investigated in a larger patient population.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), including diclofenac, are the mainstay of analgesic and anti-inflammatory treatment in dentistry. Diclofenac epolamine [diclofenac N-(2-hydroxyethyl)pyrrolidine; DHEP] is a diclofenac salt with greater water solubility and better cutaneous absorption properties than other commonly used forms of the drug. IBSA has recently developed a mouthwash formulation of DHEP for the topical treatment of inflammatory conditions of the oral cavity. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of DHEP mouthwash (Osmal®) with that of a reference product (commercially available diclofenac mouthwash). METHODS: This was a randomized, investigator-blind, parallel-group, controlled, phase III study that enrolled 80 patients with conditions affecting the oral cavity, characterized by an inflammatory component, and eligible for analgesic and anti-inflammatory treatment. Patients were randomized 1:1 to DHEP mouthwash (0.103% DHEP in aqueous solution) or to diclofenac mouthwash (0.074% free diclofenac in aqueous solution). The treatment regimen was the same in both groups: 1-minute rinse with 15 mL of mouthwash, twice daily for 7 days. Visits were scheduled at study inclusion (D0), and 3 days (D3) and 7 days (D7) after treatment initiation. During each visit assessments were made of pain severity (using a 5-point semi-quantitative scale and a 100-mm visual analogue scale [VAS]) and inflammatory signs (using a 5-point scale). The primary study endpoint was the change in pain severity scores from D0 to D3 and D7. Secondary endpoints included effects of treatment on inflammation score, quality of sleep, compliance with treatment and the safety and tolerability of treatment. RESULTS: The two treatment arms were homogeneous in terms of patient characteristics. The most prevalent oral condition was gingivitis. Overall both topical treatments were effective in alleviating pain and inflammation, as evidenced by decreases in pain and inflammation scores within 3 days after treatment initiation. Notably, a significantly greater proportion of patients treated with DHEP were free of pain and inflammatory symptoms at D3 compared with those treated with the diclofenac mouthwash (40% vs 20% of patients; p < 0.05). Also, DHEP was associated with more marked, but not statistically significant, decreases in VAS pain scores versus baseline after 3 days' treatment. Compliance with both treatments was good and both mouthwashes were well tolerated. CONCLUSION:DHEP mouthwash was at least as effective as diclofenac mouthwash at alleviating pain and inflammation symptoms and is well tolerated in patients with painful inflammatory conditions of the oral cavity. The potential of DHEP mouthwash deserves to be investigated in a larger patient population.