Takayuki Aoki1, Yoshihide Ota2, Yusuke Mori2,3, Mitsunobu Otsuru2, Mikio Ota4, Akihiro Kaneko2. 1. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Tokai University School of Medicine, 143 Shimokasuya, Isehara, Kanagawa, 253-1193, Japan. taoki123jp@ybb.ne.jp. 2. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Tokai University School of Medicine, 143 Shimokasuya, Isehara, Kanagawa, 253-1193, Japan. 3. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Imperial Gift Foundation Saiseikai Hiratsuka Hospital, 37-1 Tatsunocho, Hiratsuka, Kanagawa, 254-0046, Japan. 4. Department of Dentistry, FUJIFILM Health Care Center, 681 Kano, Minamiashigara, Kanagawa, 250-0126, Japan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor celecoxib is also used in the dental field for analgesia. However, there are few reports on the time to onset and duration of analgesia. We investigated the analgesic effect of celecoxib after oral surgery. METHODS: A total of 138 patients undergoing unilateral mandibular third molar surgery under local anesthesia were enrolled. After surgery, the patients who felt pain and requested an analgesic were instructed to take celecoxib 400 mg and to record the time. Primary efficacy outcome measures were time to onset of analgesia. In addition, the conditions of pain at the time of taking celecoxib, at the onset time of analgesia, and 2 and 6 h after taking the drug were recorded. Pain assessments were evaluated using a 10-cm visual analog scale and four-point verbal rating score. These data were documented in the questionnaire forms handed to the patients and retrieved by post. RESULTS: Effective responses without missing were returned from 103 patients. The median time to onset of the efficacy was 35 min. The pain scales at celecoxib administration was significantly higher compared with the time of onset of analgesia, 2 hours after administraton and 6 hours hours administration (P<0.05, respectively). The pain scales at the onset time of analgesia were significantly higher compared to that after 2 or 6 h of taking the drug (P<0.05, respectively). There were no statistically significant differences in the pain scales between 2 and 6 h after taking the drug (P>0.05). CONCLUSION: The analgesic effect of celecoxib was exhibited quickly and sustained after oral surgery.
PURPOSE:Cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor celecoxib is also used in the dental field for analgesia. However, there are few reports on the time to onset and duration of analgesia. We investigated the analgesic effect of celecoxib after oral surgery. METHODS: A total of 138 patients undergoing unilateral mandibular third molar surgery under local anesthesia were enrolled. After surgery, the patients who felt pain and requested an analgesic were instructed to take celecoxib 400 mg and to record the time. Primary efficacy outcome measures were time to onset of analgesia. In addition, the conditions of pain at the time of taking celecoxib, at the onset time of analgesia, and 2 and 6 h after taking the drug were recorded. Pain assessments were evaluated using a 10-cm visual analog scale and four-point verbal rating score. These data were documented in the questionnaire forms handed to the patients and retrieved by post. RESULTS: Effective responses without missing were returned from 103 patients. The median time to onset of the efficacy was 35 min. The pain scales at celecoxib administration was significantly higher compared with the time of onset of analgesia, 2 hours after administraton and 6 hours hours administration (P<0.05, respectively). The pain scales at the onset time of analgesia were significantly higher compared to that after 2 or 6 h of taking the drug (P<0.05, respectively). There were no statistically significant differences in the pain scales between 2 and 6 h after taking the drug (P>0.05). CONCLUSION: The analgesic effect of celecoxib was exhibited quickly and sustained after oral surgery.
Entities:
Keywords:
Celecoxib; Duration of analgesic effect; Oral surgery; Time to onset of analgesia
Authors: F E Silverstein; G Faich; J L Goldstein; L S Simon; T Pincus; A Whelton; R Makuch; G Eisen; N M Agrawal; W F Stenson; A M Burr; W W Zhao; J D Kent; J B Lefkowith; K M Verburg; G S Geis Journal: JAMA Date: 2000-09-13 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Francis K L Chan; Angel Lanas; James Scheiman; Manuela F Berger; Ha Nguyen; Jay L Goldstein Journal: Lancet Date: 2010-06-16 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: T Aoki; H Yamaguchi; H Naito; K Shiiki; K Izawa; Y Ota; H Sakamoto; A Kaneko Journal: Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg Date: 2006-03-15 Impact factor: 2.789
Authors: Paul J Desjardins; Vincent S Shu; David P Recker; Kenneth M Verburg; Clifford J Woolf Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Nguyen Trung Kien; Phillip Geiger; Hoang Van Chuong; Nguyen Manh Cuong; Ngo Van Dinh; Dinh Cong Pho; Vu The Anh; Nguyen Truong Giang Journal: Drug Des Devel Ther Date: 2019-07-03 Impact factor: 4.162