Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Safety of Lornoxicam in the Treatment of Postoperative Pain

A Post-Marketing Study of Analgesic Regimens Containing Lornoxicam Compared with Standard Analgesic Treatment in 3752 Day-Case Surgery Patients

  • Original Research Article
  • Published:
Clinical Drug Investigation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background: Post-marketing surveillance studies can provide supplemental data on the safety of medications in the general population. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the safety of analgesic regimens including the NSAID lornoxicam in the short-term treatment of postoperative pain in a clinically relevant population.

Study Design: Randomized, open-label, multicentre, multinational, observational cohort study of 4 days’ duration.

Setting: In-hospital postoperative setting, with discharge to home treatment within 24 hours of surgery.

Participants: Adults aged ≥18 years expected to be in need of analgesic treatment after day-case surgery.

Intervention: Analgesic regimens containing lornoxicam were compared with a standard analgesic treatment, which was defined as the treatment that the patient would normally receive at the centre.

Main Outcome Measures: Following day-case surgery, patients were provided with appropriate analgesic medication, and adverse events (AEs; defined as all recorded events with symptoms) were recorded by the investigator during the in-hospital stay and by the patient for the next 3 days using entries recorded morning and evening in a patient diary. Statistical analyses tested for between-treatment differences in AEs, adverse drug reactions (ADRs; defined as events probably, possibly or unlikely to be related to treatment) and gastrointestinal AEs (GI-AEs).

Results: A total of 4152 patients were randomized to treatment. Since 400 patients did not take any analgesic, the safety population consisted of 1838 patients for lornoxicam and 1914 patients for standard analgesic treatment. Demographic and disease characteristics were similar between the two treatment groups, as were the type of surgery and the anaesthesia used in surgery. In the safety population, 16.9% of patients received no analgesic in hospital, and when analgesics were provided they were often administered in combination. Similarly, approximately 17% of patients did not take any analgesics at home. AEs were reported in 27.1% and 29.4% of patients in the lornoxicam and standard analgesic treatment groups, respectively, and ADRs constituted the majority of these events. No significant differences were demonstrated with regard to the incidence of AEs between the two groups. Most events were of mild or moderate intensity. Consistent with what may be expected for an NSAID, most AEs with lornoxicam were related to the GI system. GI-AEs were reported in 19.5% and 21.3% of patients in the lornoxicam and standard analgesic treatment groups, respectively, and most of these were considered ADRs. Most patients were satisfied with their pain treatment both in hospital and at home.

Conclusion: Lornoxicam-containing regimens are as well tolerated as other analgesic regimens over 4 days in the treatment of postoperative pain.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Table I
Table II
Table III
Table IV
Table V
Fig. 2
Table VI

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Linden M. Differences in adverse drug reactions in phase III and phase IV of the drug evaluation process. Psychopharmacol Bull 1993; 29: 51–6

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Lawson DH. Postmarketing surveillance versus clinical trials: which benefits the patient? Cardiology 1994; 85Suppl. 1:18–23

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ghandi M, Ameli N, Bacchetti P, et al. Eligibility criteria for HIV clinical trials and generalizability of results: the gap between published reports and study protocols. AIDS 2005; 19: 1885–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. DeMaria AN. Clinical trials and clinical judgement. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008; 51: 1120–2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. European Commission. Guidelines on pharmacovigilance for medicinal products for human use: volume 9A of the rules governing medicinal products in the European Union final January 2007. Part 1, section 7: Company-sponsored post-authorisation safety studies [online]. Available from URL: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/pharmaceuticals/eudralex/vol-9/pdf/vol9 A_2007-01.pdf [Accessed 2008 Oct]

  6. Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI). Guidelines for company-sponsored safety assessment of marketed medicines (SAMM). In: ABPI compendium of data sheets and summaries of product characteristics. London: Datapharm Publications, 1994

  7. Berry H, Bird HA, Black C, et al. A double blind, multicentre, placebo controlled trial of lornoxicam in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip and knee. Ann Rheum Dis 1992; 51: 238–42

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Kidd B, Frenzel W. A multicenter, randomized, double blind study comparing lornoxicam with diclofenac in osteoar-thritis. J Rheumatol 1996; 23: 1605–11

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Caruso I, Montrone F, Boari L, et al. Lornoxicam versus diclofenac in rheumatoid arthritis: a double-blind, multicenter study. Adv Ther 1994; 11: 132–8

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bernstein RM, Calin HJ, Calin A, et al. A comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of lornoxicam and indomethacin in ankylosing spondylitis. Eur J Rheumatol Inflamm 1992; 12: 6–13

    Google Scholar 

  11. Rainer F, Klein G, Mayrhofer F, et al. A prospective, multicentre, open-label, uncontrolled phase II study of the local tolerability, safety and efficacy of intramuscular chlorte-noxicam in patients with acute low back pain. Eur J Clin Res 1996; 8: 1–13

    Google Scholar 

  12. Yakhno N, Guekht A, Skoromets A, et al. Analgesic efficacy and safety of lornoxicam quick-release formulation compared with diclofenac potassium. Clin Drug Investig 2006; 26: 267–77

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Nørholt SE, Sindet-Pedersen S, Larsen U, et al. Pain control after dental surgery: a double-blind, randomised trial of lornoxicam versus morphine. Pain 1996; 67: 335–43

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Rosenow DE, Albrechtsen M, Stolke D. A comparison of patient-controlled analgesia with lornoxicam versus morphine in patients undergoing lumbar disk surgery. Anesth Analg 1998; 86: 1045–50

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Staunstrup H, Ovesen J, Larsen UT, et al. Efficacy and tolerability of lornoxicam versus tramadol in postoperative pain. J Clin Pharmacol 1999; 39: 1–8

    Google Scholar 

  16. Rosenow DE, Van Krieken F, Kursten FW. Intravenous administration of lornoxicam, a new NSAID, and pethidine for postoperative pain: a placebo-controlled pilot study. Clin Drug Investig 1996; 11: 11–9

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Papadima A, Lagoudianakis EE, Antonakis PT, et al. Parecoxib vs lornoxicam in the treatment of postoperative pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective randomized placebo-controlled trial. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2007; 24: 154–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Sener M, Yilmazer C, Yilmaz I, et al. Patient-controlled analgesia with lornoxicam vs dipyrone for acute postoperative PAR after septorhinoplasty: a prospective, randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled study. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2008; 25: 177–82

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Sener M, Yilmazer C, Yilmaz I, et al. Efficacy of lornoxicam for acute postoperative pain relief after septoplasty: a comparison with diclofenac, ketoprofen, and dipyrone. J Clin Anesth 2008; 20: 103–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Berg J, Fellier H, Christoph T, et al. The analgesic NSAID lornoxicam inhibits cyclooxygenase (COX)-1/-2, inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS), and the formation of interleukin (IL)-6 in vitro. Inflamm Res 1999; 48: 369–79

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Hitzenberger G, Radhofer-Welte S, Takacs SF, et al. Pharmacokinetics of lornoxicam in man. Postgrad Med J 1990; 66Suppl. 4: 22–6

    Google Scholar 

  22. Ankier SI, Brimelow AE, Crome P, et al. Chlortenoxicam pharmacokinetics in young and elderly human volunteers. Postgrad Med J 1988; 64: 752–4

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Radhofer-Welte S, Rabasseda X. Lornoxicam, a new potent NSAID with an improved tolerability profile. Drugs Today 2000; 36: 55–76

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Committee for Proprietary Medical Products. Draft Guideline for Marketing Authorisation Holders on company-sponsored post-marketing safety studies. III/3176/93-EN. Draft no. 3. 1993. Commission of the European Communities

  25. Rose P, Steinhauser C. Comparison of lornoxicam and rofecoxib in patients with activated osteoarthritis (COLOR Study). Clin Drug Investig 2004; 24: 227–36

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Laine L. Approaches to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use in the high-risk patient. Gastroenterology 2001; 120: 594–606

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The following investigators took part in the study:

Austria: Alfred Engel, Vienna; Karl Gruber, Weiz; Hans Georg Kress, Vienna; Rudolf Likar, Klagenfurt; Hans-Jörg Mischinger, Graz; Martin Mähring, Bruck a.d. Mur; Ernst Orthner, Wels; Franz Ortner, Wiener Neustadt; Danojla Roscic, Linz; Klaus Peter Samlicki, Wolfsberg; Gottfried Sauer, Eisenstadt; Mathias Scheyer, Feldkirch; Wolfgang Trost, Lienz; Christian Wurnig, Vienna; Michael Zimpfer, Vienna; Hans-Jörg Zinnecker, Mistelbach.

Denmark: Peter Ahlburg, Århus; Michael Crawford, Copenhagen; Jens Engbaek, Herlev; Nils-Christian Hjortsø, Glostrup; Birgitte Bruun Islev, Skive; Mogens Berg Laursen, Aalborg; Claus M. Lund, Hvidovre; Lars Riishede, Faaborg; Lilli Sørensen, Give; Dusanka Zaric, Frederiksberg.

Sweden: Anders Amilon, Örebro; Claes Bern, Hässleholm; Ulf Broström, Piteå; Thomas Dolk, Örebro; Jan Jakobsson, Stockholm; Jon Karlsson, Göteborg; Björn Nyberg, Huddinge; Dag Sandblom, Kristinehamn; Peter Spetz, Eskilstuna; Albert Sundberg, Eksjö.

Statistical analyses were performed at UNI·C, Århus, Denmark by Tine Høtbjerg Henriksen, MSc.

Editorial assistance with the manuscript was funded by Nycomed and the authors took the overall decision to submit the manuscript. The authors would like to thank ScopeMedical Ltd for editorial assistance with the manuscript.

Charlotte Hejl and Marija Simin-Geertsen are employees of Nycomed. Narinder Rawal, Karsten Krøner and Rudolf Likar have acted as consultants to Nycomed or received honoraria for speaking at Nycomed-sponsored meetings.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Örebro Medical Centre Hospital, Örebro, Sweden

    Narinder Rawal

  2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Århus University Hospital, Århus, Denmark

    Karsten Krøner

  3. MSc, Nycomed Group, Langebjerg 1, PO Box 88, DK-4000, Roskilde, Denmark

    Marija Simin-Geertsen & Charlotte Hejl

  4. Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, General Hospital Klagenfurt, Klagenfurt, Austria

    Rudolf Likar

Authors
  1. Narinder Rawal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Karsten Krøner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marija Simin-Geertsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Charlotte Hejl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Rudolf Likar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Charlotte Hejl.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rawal, N., Krøner, K., Simin-Geertsen, M. et al. Safety of Lornoxicam in the Treatment of Postoperative Pain. Clin. Drug Investig. 30, 687–697 (2010). https://doi.org/10.2165/11538860-000000000-00000

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/11538860-000000000-00000

Keywords

Search

Navigation