Schmieder G, Stankov G, Zerle G, Schinzel S, Brune K
DIAS Institute for Drug Investigation, Auditing and Statistics, Kirchheim/München, Fed. Rep. of Germany.
Arzneimittelforschung. 1993 Nov;43(11):1216-21.
To investigate the combined analgesic and spasmolytic effect of metamizole (dipyrone, Novalgin, CAS 68-89-3) this drug was compared with an opioid analgesic (tramadol) and a pure spasmolytic drug (butylscopolamine). In a multicentre, observer-blind, parallel-group study conducted in five German centres 74 patients suffering from "severe" or "excruciating" colic pain caused by a calculus in the bile duct were randomized to receive intravenously 2.5 g metamizole (25 patients), 100 mg tramadol (25 patients), or 20 mg butylscopolamine (24 patients). The three treatment groups were homogeneous for age, sex, height, weight and baseline pain intensity. Metamizole was significantly more effective in reducing pain than tramadol and butylscopolamine for the primary endpoint, pain intensity on a visual analogue scale (VAS) when evaluated as the area under the curve (AUC) from baseline to onset of analgesic action (p < 0.05) and the sum of pain intensity differences (SPID) for the observation period of 2 h (p < 0.005). The mean time until the onset of analgesic action occurred was shortest (p < 0.005) for metamizole (10.9 +/- 5.8 min) compared with tramadol (15.8 +/- 11.7 min) and butylscopolamine (25.6 +/- 24.3 min). Metamizole was also more effective for the secondary efficacy endpoint, pain intensity on a 5-point ordinal scale. In the patient's overall assessment of treatment efficacy at the end of the trial, metamizole was rated as the most effective drug (p < 0.005). Fewer patients in the metamizole (3) and the tramadol (1) groups than in the butylscopolamine group (8) needed a second injection of the "rescue" medication (p < 0.05).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
为研究安乃近(双氯芬酸钠,诺瓦经,CAS 68-89-3)的联合镇痛和解痉作用,将该药物与一种阿片类镇痛药(曲马多)和一种纯解痉药(丁溴东莨菪碱)进行比较。在德国五个中心开展的一项多中心、观察者盲法、平行组研究中,74例因胆管结石导致“严重”或“剧痛”性绞痛的患者被随机分组,分别静脉注射2.5 g安乃近(25例患者)、100 mg曲马多(25例患者)或20 mg丁溴东莨菪碱(24例患者)。三个治疗组在年龄、性别、身高、体重和基线疼痛强度方面具有同质性。对于主要终点,即从基线到镇痛作用开始期间视觉模拟量表(VAS)上的疼痛强度,以曲线下面积(AUC)评估时,安乃近在减轻疼痛方面比曲马多和丁溴东莨菪碱更有效(p < 0.05);在2小时观察期内,安乃近的疼痛强度差异总和(SPID)也更显著(p < 0.005)。与曲马多(15.8 +/- 11.7分钟)和丁溴东莨菪碱(25.6 +/- 24.3分钟)相比,安乃近镇痛作用开始的平均时间最短(p < 0.005)(10.9 +/- 5.8分钟)。对于次要疗效终点,即5级序数量表上的疼痛强度,安乃近也更有效。在试验结束时患者对治疗效果的总体评估中,安乃近被评为最有效的药物(p < 0.005)。与丁溴东莨菪碱组(8例)相比,安乃近组(3例)和曲马多组(1例)中需要第二次注射“急救”药物的患者更少(p < 0.05)。(摘要截选至250字)