Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for acute renal colic
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Urolithiasis (urinary stones) is a common disease with an increasing incidence globally. It often presents with renal colic, which is characterised by acute and intense abdominal pain. The first step in the management of renal colic is pain control. Various medications, including narcotics, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), antispasmodics, and others, have been used for this condition. NSAIDs are amongst the most commonly used drugs for renal colic. They act by reducing inflammation and lowering the pressure inside the urinary collecting system. This review updates a previous Cochrane Systematic Review (Afshar 2015), focusing exclusively on NSAIDs. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of different nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for the management of pain in adults with acute renal colic. SEARCH METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search of the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Google Scholar, trial registries, and conference proceedings up to 25 August 2023. We applied no restrictions on publication language or status. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised (or quasi-randomised) controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of NSAIDs in the management of renal colic adult patients (i.e. study participants over 16 years of age). We included studies that compared NSAIDs versus placebo, one NSAID versus another, or different doses or routes of administration of the same NSAID. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently classified studies and abstracted data from the included studies. Primary outcomes included pain up to one hour after treatment as measured by a validated patient-reported tool, the need for rescue medication up to six hours after treatment, and serious adverse events up to one week after treatment. Secondary outcomes included pain recurrence, significant pain relief, and minor adverse events. We performed meta-analysis using the random-effects model. We rated the certainty of evidence according to the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: = 42%; 2 studies, 134 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Intravenous NSAIDs may reduce the need for rescue medication within 30 minutes compared to rectal NSAIDs (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.88; 1 study, 116 participants; low-certainty evidence). The evidence is uncertain regarding the potential harms of NSAIDs. Risk of bias We judged the risk of bias in the studies to be moderate to high. This was due to a high proportion of unknown risk judgments for concealment bias and a high risk of selective reporting bias. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: NSAIDs may reduce pain in adult patients with renal colic compared to placebo. Comparing one NSAID against another, IV ketorolac may be less effective than IV ibuprofen, and pirprofen may result in less need for rescue medication than indomethacin. The intravenous route of administration is probably similar to the intramuscular route but may be better than the rectal route. The evidence is uncertain regarding the potential harms of NSAIDs. We were not able to perform subgroup analysis based on our predefined criteria because there were no eligible studies.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,007 | 0,027 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,007 | 0,004 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,008 | 0,007 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,008 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».