Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Jedna doza dipirona (metamizola) za akutnu postoperativnu bol u odraslih

Contraer todo Desplegar todo

Referencias

References to studies included in this review

Bhounsule 1990 {published data only}

Bhounsule SA, Nevreker PR, Agshikar NV, Pal MN, Dhume VG. A comparison of four analgesics in post‐episiotomy pain. Indian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology 1990;34(1):34‐8. CENTRAL

Boraks 1987 {published data only}

Boraks S. Low dose flurbiprofen compared to dipyrone, acetylsalicylic acid and placebo in the treatment of post‐extraction dental pain [Flurbiprofen em dose baixa comparado a dipirona, acido acetilsalicilico e placebo no tratamento da dor pos‐extracao dentaria]. Arquivos Brasileiros de Medicina 1987;61:424‐30. CENTRAL

De Miguel Rivero 1997 {published data only}

De Miguel Rivero C, Araujo CG, Sousa MM, Saenz López de Rueda F, Luna González F, Padilla Márquez A, et al. Comparative efficacy of oral ibuprofen‐arginine, intramuscular magnesic dipyrone and placebo in patients with postoperative pain following total hip replacement. Clinical Drug Investigation 1997;14(4):276‐85. CENTRAL

Dos Santos Pereira 1986 {published data only}

Dos Santos Pereira E. Comparative study of acetaminophen, dipyrone and placebo in the treatment of postoperative pain in orthopedics [Estudo comparativo entre acetaminofen, dipirona e placebo no tratamento da dor pós‐operatória em ortopedia]. Folha Médica 1986;92(1/2):99‐105. CENTRAL

Olson 1999 {published data only}

Olson NZ, Sunshine A, Zighelboim I, Lange R. Analgesic efficacy of liquid ketoprofen compared to liquid dipyrone and placebo administered orally as drops in postepisiotomy pain. International Journal of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics 1999;37(4):168‐74. CENTRAL

Pinto 1984 {published data only}

Pinto JA, Rosenberg PH, Heino A, Scheinin B. Evaluation of acetaminophen, dipyrone and placebo in the treatment of post‐tonsillectomy pain [Avaliacao de acetaminofen, dipirona e placebo no tratamento da dor pos‐amigdalectomia]. Revista Brasileira de Cirurgia 1984;74(4):185‐90. CENTRAL

Rubinstein 1986 {published data only}

Rubinstein I, Canalini AF. Double‐blind study comparing acetaminophen, dipyrone and placebo on postoperative pain in urology [Estudo duplo‐cego comparativo entre acetaminofen, dipirona e placebo na dor pós‐operatória em urologia]. Folha Médica 1986;92:201‐6. CENTRAL

Sakata 1986 {published data only}

Sakata RK, Lauzi J, Kuniyoshi HS, Ono MT. Comparative double‐blind study with a single dose of acetaminophen, dipyrone and placebo in the treatment of postoperative pain. Revista Brasileira de Cirurgia 1986;76(5):301‐4. CENTRAL

References to studies excluded from this review

Aizawa 1972 {published data only}

Aizawa N, Mivagawa H, Kitamura M, Yamamoto T, Koide A. Effect of d‐propoxyphene napsylate (S‐9700) on postoperative pain. Saishin Igaku. Modern Medicine 1972;27:750‐5. CENTRAL

Bagan 1998 {published data only}

Bagan JV, Lopez Arranz JS, Valencia E, Santamaría J, Eguidazu I, Horas M, et al. Clinical comparison of dexketoprofen trometamol and dipyrone in postoperative dental pain. Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 1998;38 12 Suppl:55S‐64S. CENTRAL

Bosch 1990 {published data only}

Bosch F, Toranzo I, Banos JE. Dental pain as a model for studying self‐medication with analgesics. European Journal of Pharmacology 1990;183(3):1036‐7. CENTRAL

Brodner 2011 {published data only}

Brodner G, Gogarten W, Van Aken H, Hahnenkamp K, Wempe C, Freise H, et al. Efficacy of intravenous paracetamol compared to dipyrone and parecoxib for postoperative pain management after minor‐to‐intermediate surgery: a randomised, double‐blind trial. European Journal of Anaesthesiology 2011;28(2):125‐32. [DOI: 10.1097/EJA.0b013e32833fedfa]CENTRAL

Casali 1981 {published data only}

Casali R, Novelli GP, Bonetti L. A comparison of dipyrone with pethidine in post‐operative pain. Anestesia e Rianimazione 1981;22:143‐54. CENTRAL

Castro 2000 {published data only}

Castro F, Pardo D, Mosquera G, Peleteiro R, Camba MA. Postoperative pain management with PCA in upper abdominal surgery: a comparative study, versus metamizol tramadol and ketorolac [Tratamiento del dolor postoperatorio con PCA en cirugía del abdomen superior: estudio comparativo, tramadol versus metamizol y ketorolaco]. Revista de la Sociedad Espanola del Dolor 2000;7:12‐6. CENTRAL

Daftary 1980 {published data only}

Daftary SN, Mehta AC, Nanavati M. A controlled comparison of dipyrone and paracetamol in post‐episiotomy pain. Current Medical Research and Opinion 1980;6(9):614‐8. CENTRAL

Ferrario 1984 {published data only}

Ferrario F, Frassineti L. IV ASA for post‐surgical pain of the spine. European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences 1984;6(1):147‐52. CENTRAL

Frantz 2009 {published data only}

Frantz KA, Moura Filho EdeR, Abud BM, Avila MP, Magacho L. Comparison of the analgesic effect between 90 mg etoricoxib and dipyrone after exeresis of primary pterygium with conjunctival autograft [Comparaçao do efeito analgesico entre etoricoxib 90 mg e dipirona sodica na exerese de pterigio primario com transplante autologo de conjuntiva]. Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia 2009;72(5):661‐4. [DOI: 10.1590/S0004‐27492009000500012]CENTRAL

Gomez Jimenez 1980 {published data only}

Gomez Jimenez J, Franco Patino R, Chargoy Vera J, Olivares Sosa R. Clinical efficacy of mild analgesics in pain following gynaecological or dental surgery: report on multicentre studies (Studies 1 & 2). British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 1980;10 Suppl 2:355S‐8S. CENTRAL

Gonzalez Garcia 1994 {published data only}

Gonzalez Garcia CA, Ibarra Ibarra LG, Barbosa Vivanco S. Comparative study of ketorolac and dipyrone administered orally in the treatment of postoperative pain. Proceedings of the Western Pharmacology Society 1994;37:121‐2. CENTRAL

Goutaine 1975 {published data only}

Goutaine DJ. Valve of the use of an analgesic and antispasmodic medication in surgery. Semaine des hopitaux. Therapeutique 1975;51(1):15‐8. CENTRAL

Hernandez 1997 {published data only}

Hernandez LG. Comparison of analgesia provided by dipyrone and diclofenac in postoperative patients of abdominal surgery [Comparacion de la analgesia proporcionada por diclofenaco y dipirona en pacientes posoperados de cirugia de abdomen]. Anestesia En Mexico 1997;9:137‐42. CENTRAL

Herrera Barroso 1982 {published data only}

Herrera Barroso M, Monroe P, Neuvonen PJ. Double‐blind evaluation of analgesic efficacy and tolerance of sodium and dipyrone zomepirac, a single dose in postoperative pain [Evaluacion doble ciego de la eficacia analgesica y tolerancia de zomepirac sodico y dipirona, a dosis unica en dolor posoperatorio]. Investigacion Medica Internacional 1982;9(2):164‐70. CENTRAL

Ibarra‐Ibarra 1993 {published data only}

Ibarra‐Ibarra LG, Cubillo MA, Silva Adaya A, Gonzalez Garcia CA. Comparative study of ketorolac and dipyrone in the treatment of postoperative pain. Proceedings of the Western Pharmacology Society 1993;36:133‐5. CENTRAL

Lal 1973 {published data only}

Lal A, Pandey K, Chandra P, Pande SB. Dipyrone for treatment of post‐operative pain. Anaesthesia 1973;28(1):43‐7. CENTRAL

Martin Duce 1997 {published data only}

Martin Duce A, Moreno J, Puerta J, Ortiz P. Effectiveness of metamizol in the management of pain after abdominal surgery: comparison of 1 or 2 g by the intramuscular or intravenous route. Pain Clinic 1997;10(1):27‐34. CENTRAL

Mehta 1967 {published data only}

Mehta S. Comparison of pethidine with sodium phenyldimethyl pyrazolone methylaminomethane sulphonate (novalgin) and placebo in postoperative pain. Indian Journal of Anaesthesia 1967;15:232. CENTRAL

Mendl 1992 {published data only}

Mendl G. Controlled clinical trials of dipyrone in post‐operative pain conditions. Satellite symposium to the World Conference on Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics in Yokohama, Japan. World Conference on Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 1992. CENTRAL

Mukherjee 1980 {published data only}

Mukherjee S, Sood S. A controlled evaluation of orally administered aspirin, dipyrone and placebo in patients with post‐operative pain. Current Medical Research and Opinion 1980;6(9):619‐23. CENTRAL

Noronha 2009 {published data only}

Noronha VR, Gurgel GD, Alves LC, Noman‐Ferreira LC, Mendonça LL, Aguiar EG, et al. Analgesic efficacy of lysine clonixinate, paracetamol and dipyrone in lower third molar extraction: a randomized controlled trial. Medicina oral, patología oral y cirugía bucal 2009;14(8):e411‐5. CENTRAL

Patel 1980 {published data only}

Patel CV, Koppikar MG, Patel MS, Parulkar GB. A double‐blind comparison of parenteral dipyrone and pethidine in the treatment of post‐operative pain. Current Medical Research and Opinion 1980;6(9):624‐9. CENTRAL
Patel CV, Koppikar MG, Patel MS, Parulkar GB, Pinto Pereira LM. A double blind comparison of parenteral analgin with pethidine. Journal of Postgraduate Medicine 1980;26(3):162‐6. CENTRAL
Patel CV, Koppikar MG, Patel MS, Parulkar GB, Pinto Pereira LM. Management of pain after abdominal surgery: dipyrone compared with pethidine. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 1980;10:351S‐4S. CENTRAL

Quiñones 1993 {published data only}

Quiñones R, Oscar A. Comparative study of the efficacy of analgesic of the analgesic in the postoperative pain of general surgery [Estudio comparativo de la eficacia analgesica de la buprenorfina, clorhidrato de nalbufina, clohidrato de tramadol y dipirona en el manejo dl dolor postoperative de cirugia general y traumatologia]. Med Postgrad Mayo‐Augusto 1993;9(2):19‐35. CENTRAL

Reyes 1988 {published data only}

Reyes F. Randomized comparative double‐blind study between sodium diclofenac and sodium dipyrone in post operative pain [Estudio doble ciego randomizado comparativo entre diclofenaco sódico y dipirona sódica en dolor postquirúrgico]. Compendium de Investigaciones Clínicas Latinoamericanas 1988;8:65‐73. CENTRAL

Rosas Pérez 1986 {published data only}

Rosas Pérez O, Salinas FA. Rating analgesic efficacy and tolerability of Suprofen and dipyrone in patients with episiotomy pain [Valoración del efecto analgésico y tolerabilidad de suprofén y dipirona en pracientes con dolor debido a episiotomía]. Investigacion Médica Internacional 1986;13:105‐8. CENTRAL

Saray 2001 {published data only}

Saray A, Büyükkocak U, Cinel I, Tellioglu AT, Oral U. Diclofenac and metamizol in postoperative analgesia in plastic surgery. Acta Chirurgiae Plasticae 2001;43(3):71‐6. CENTRAL

Sener 2008 {published data only}

Sener M, Yilmazer C, Yilmaz I, Bozdogan N, Ozer C, Donmez A, et al. Efficacy of lornoxicam for acute postoperative pain relief after septoplasty: a comparison with diclofenac, ketoprofen, and dipyrone. Journal of Clinical Anesthesia 2008;20(2):103‐8. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2007.09.009]CENTRAL

Stankov 1995 {published data only}

Stankov G, Schmieder G, Lechner FJ, Schinzel S. Observer‐blind multicentre study with dipyrone versus tramadol in postoperative pain. European Journal of Pain 1995;16(1‐2):56‐63. CENTRAL

Andersohn 2007

Andersohn F, Konzen C, Garbe E. Systematic review: agranulocytosis induced by nonchemotherapy drugs. Annals of Internal Medicine 2007;146:657‐65. [DOI: 10.7326/0003‐4819‐146‐9‐200705010‐00009]

Andrade 1998

Andrade SE, Martinez C, Walker AM. Comparative safety evaluation of non‐narcotic analgesics. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1998;51(12):1357‐65. [DOI: 10.1016/S0895‐4356(98)00076‐6]

Arellano 1990

Arellano F, Sacristán JA. Metamizole: reassessment of its therapeutic role. European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 1990;38(6):617‐9. [DOI: 10.1007/BF00278592]

Barden 2004

Barden J, Edwards JE, McQuay HJ, Moore RA. Pain and analgesic response after third molar extraction and other postsurgical pain. Pain 2004;107(1‐2):86‐90. [DOI: 10.1016/j.pain.2003.09.021]

Bonkowsky 2002

Bonkowsky JL, Frazer JK, Buchi KF, Byington CL. Metamizole use by Latino immigrants: a common and potentially harmful home remedy. Pediatrics 2002;109(6):e98. [DOI: 10.1542/peds.109.6.e98]

Collins 1997

Collins SL, Moore RA, McQuay HJ. The visual analogue pain intensity scale: what is moderate pain in millimetres?. Pain 1997;72:95‐7. [DOI: 10.1016/S0304‐3959(97)00005‐5]

Collins 2001

Collins SL, Edwards J, Moore RA, Smith LA, McQuay HJ. Seeking a simple measure of analgesia for mega‐trials: is a single global assessment good enough?. Pain 2001;91(1‐2):189‐94. [DOI: 10.1016/S0304‐3959(00)00435‐8]

Cook 1995

Cook RJ, Sackett DL. The number needed to treat: a clinically useful measure of treatment effect. BMJ 1995;310:452‐4. [DOI: 10.1136/bmj.310.6977.452]

Cooper 1991

Cooper SA. Single‐dose analgesic studies: the upside and downside of assay sensitivity. In: Max MB, Portenoy RK, Laska EM editor(s). The Design of Analgesic Clinical Trials. Advances in Pain Research and Therapy. Vol. 18, New York: Raven Press, 1991:117‐24.

Dechartres 2013

Dechartres A, Trinquart L, Boutron I, Ravaud P. Influence of trial sample size on treatment effect estimates: meta‐epidemiological study. BMJ 2013;346:f2304. [DOI: 10.1136/bmj.f2304]

Edwards 2002

Edwards JE, McQuay HJ. Dipyrone and agranulocytosis: what is the risk?. Lancet 2002;360(9344):1438. [DOI: 10.1016/S0140‐6736(02)11489‐9]

FitzGerald 2001

FitzGerald GA, Patrono C. The coxibs, selective inhibitors of cyclooxygenase‐2. New England Journal of Medicine 2001;345(6):433‐42. [DOI: 10.1056/NEJM200108093450607]

GRADEpro GDT 2016 [Computer program]

McMaster University (developed by Evidence Prime, Inc.). GRADEpro Guideline Development Tool [Software]. Available from www.gradepro.org (accessed 3 March 2016). McMaster University (developed by Evidence Prime, Inc.), 2016.

Hawkey 1999

Hawkey CJ. Cox‐2 inhibitors. Lancet 1999;353(9149):307‐14. [DOI: 10.1016/S0140‐6736(98)12154‐2]

Hawkey 2002

Hawkey C. Cyclooxygenase inhibition: between the devil and the deep blue sea. Gut 2002;50 Suppl 3:iii25‐iii30. [DOI: 10.1136/gut.50.suppl_3.iii25]

Hedenmalm 2002

Hedenmalm K, Spigset O. Agranulocytosis and other blood dyscrasias associated with dipyrone (metamizole). European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 2002;58:265‐74. [DOI: 10.1007/s00228‐002‐0465‐2]

Higgins 2011

Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org.

Huber 2014

Huber M, Andersohn F, Bronder E, Klimpel A, Thomae M, Konzen C, et al. Drug‐induced agranulocytosis in the Berlin case‐control surveillance study. European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 2014;70(3):339‐45. [DOI: 10.1007/s00228‐013‐1618‐1]

IAAAS 1986

The International Agranulocytosis and Aplastic Anemia Study. Risks of agranulocytosis and aplastic anemia ‐ a first report of their relation to drug use with special reference to analgesics. JAMA 1986;256(13):1749‐57. [DOI: 10.1001/jama.1986.03380130077032]

Ibáñez 2005

Ibáñez L, Vidal X, Ballarín E, Laporte J‐R. Agranulocytosis associated with dipyrone (metamizol). European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 2005;60:821‐9. [DOI: 10.1007/s00228‐004‐0836‐y]

Jadad 1996a

Jadad AR, Carroll D, Moore A, McQuay H. Developing a database of published reports of randomised clinical trials in pain research. Pain 1996;66:239‐46. [DOI: 10.1016/0304‐3959(96)03033‐3]

Jadad 1996b

Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJM, Gavaghan DJ, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary?. Controlled Clinical Trials 1996;17:1‐12. [DOI: 10.1016/0197‐2456(95)00134‐4]

Jage 2008

Jage J, Laufenberg‐Feldmann R, Heid F. Drugs for postoperative analgesia: routine and new aspects. Part 1: non‐opioids [Medikamente zur postoperativen Schmerztherapie: Bewahrtes und Neues. Teil 1: Nichtopioide]. Der Anaesthesist 2008;57(4):382‐90. [DOI: 10.1007/s00101‐008‐1326‐x]

Kramer 1988

Kramer MS. The International Agranulocytosis and Aplastic Anemia Study (IAAAS). Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1988;41(6):613‐4. [DOI: 10.1016/0895‐4356(88)90069‐8]

Kötter 2015

Kötter T, da Costa BR, Fässler M, Blozik E, Linde K, Jüni P, et al. Metamizole‐associated adverse events: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. PLoS One 2015;10(4):e0122918. [DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0122918]

L'Abbé 1987

L'Abbé KA, Detsky AS, O'Rourke K. Meta‐analysis in clinical research. Annals of Internal Medicine 1987;107:224‐33. [DOI: 10.7326/0003‐4819‐107‐2‐224]

Laporte 1991

Laporte J, Carne X. Upper gastrointestinal bleeding in relation to previous use of analgesics and non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs. Lancet 1991;337(8733):85‐9. [DOI: 10.1016/0140‐6736(91)90744‐A]

Laporte 2004

Laporte JR, Ibáñez L, Vidal X, Vendrell L, Leone R. Upper gastrointestinal bleeding associated with the use of NSAIDs: newer versus older agents. Drug Safety 2004;27(6):411‐20. [PUBMED: 15144234]

Lobo 2013

Lobo MG, Pinheiro SM, Castro JG, Momenté VG, Pranchevicius MC. Adverse drug reaction monitoring: support for pharmacovigilance at a tertiary care hospital in Northern Brazil. BMC Pharmacology & Toxicology 2013;14:5. [DOI: 10.1186/2050‐6511‐14‐5]

McQuay 2005

McQuay HJ, Moore RA. Placebo. Postgraduate Medical Journal 2005;81:155‐60. [DOI: 10.1136/pgmj.2004.024737]

Moore 1996

Moore A, McQuay H, Gavaghan D. Deriving dichotomous outcome measures from continuous data in randomised controlled trials of analgesics. Pain 1996;66(2‐3):229‐37. [DOI: 10.1016/0304‐3959(96)03032‐1]

Moore 1997a

Moore A, McQuay H, Gavaghan D. Deriving dichotomous outcome measures from continuous data in randomised controlled trials of analgesics: verification from independent data. Pain 1997;69(1‐2):127‐30. [DOI: 10.1016/S0304‐3959(96)03251‐4]

Moore 1997b

Moore A, Moore O, McQuay H, Gavaghan D. Deriving dichotomous outcome measures from continuous data in randomised controlled trials of analgesics: use of pain intensity and visual analogue scales. Pain 1997;69(3):311‐5. [DOI: 10.1016/S0304‐3959(96)03306‐4]

Moore 1998

Moore RA, Gavaghan D, Tramer MR, Collins SL, McQuay HJ. Size is everything ‐ large amounts of information are needed to overcome random effects in estimating direction and magnitude of treatment effects. Pain 1998;78(3):209‐16. [DOI: 10.1016/S0304‐3959(98)00140‐7]

Moore 2003

Moore RA, Edwards J, Barden J, McQuay HJ. Bandolier's Little Book of Pain. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003. [ISBN: 0‐19‐263247‐7]

Moore 2005

Moore RA, Edwards JE, McQuay HJ. Acute pain: individual patient meta‐analysis shows the impact of different ways of analysing and presenting results. Pain 2005;116(3):322‐31. [DOI: 10.1016/j.pain.2005.05.001]

Moore 2006

Moore A, McQuay H. Bandolier's Little Book of Making Sense of the Medical Evidence. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006. [ISBN: 0‐19‐856604‐2]

Moore 2008

Moore RA, Barden J, Derry S, McQuay HJ. Managing potential publication bias. In: McQuay HJ, Kalso E, Moore RA editor(s). Systematic Reviews in Pain Research: Methodology Refined. Seattle: IASP Press, 2008:15‐23. [ISBN: 978‐0‐931092‐69‐5]

Moore 2015a

Moore RA, Derry S, Aldington D, Wiffen PJ. Single dose oral analgesics for acute postoperative pain in adults ‐ an overview of Cochrane reviews. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2015, Issue 9. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008659.pub3]

Moore 2015b

Moore RA, Derry S, Aldington D, Wiffen PJ. Adverse events associated with single dose oral analgesics for acute postoperative pain in adults ‐ an overview of Cochrane reviews. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2015, Issue 10. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011407.pub2]

Morris 1995

Morris JA, Gardner MJ. Calculating confidence intervals for relative risk, odds ratios and standardised ratios and rates. In: Gardner MJ, Altman DG editor(s). Statistics with Confidence ‐ Confidence Intervals and Statistical Guidelines. London: BMJ Books, 1995:50‐63.

Mérida Rodrigo 2009

Mérida Rodrigo L, Faus Felipe V, Poveda Gómez F, García Alegría J. Agranulocytosis from metamizole: a potential problem for the British population. Revista Clinica Espanola 2009;209(4):176‐9. [PUBMED: 19457324]

Nikolova 2013

Nikolova I, Petkova V, Tencheva J, Benbasat N, Voinikov J, Danchev N. Metamizole: a review profile of a well‐known "forgotten" drug. Part II: clinical profile. Biotechnology and Biotechnological Equipment 2013;27(2):3605‐19.

Nüesch 2010

Nüesch E, Trelle S, Reichenbach S, Rutjes AW, Tschannen B, Altman DG, et al. Small study effects in meta‐analyses of osteoarthritis trials: meta‐epidemiological study. BMJ 2010;341:c3515. [DOI: 10.1136/bmj.c3515]

PaPaS 2012

PaPaS author and referee guidance. http://papas.cochrane.org/papas‐documents (accessed 23 March 2016).

Patrono 2009

Patrono C, Baigent C. Low‐dose aspirin, coxibs, and other NSAIDS: a clinical mosaic emerges. Molecular Interventions 2009;9(1):31‐9. [DOI: 10.1124/mi.9.1.8]

RevMan 2014 [Computer program]

The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan). Version 5.3. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014.

Tramèr 1997

Tramèr MR, Reynolds DJM, Moore RA, McQuay HJ. Impact of covert duplicate results on meta‐analysis: a case study. BMJ 1997;315:635‐9. [DOI: 10.1136/bmj.315.7109.635]

Zukowski 2009

Zukowski M, Kotfis K. Safety of metamizole and paracetamol for acute pain treatment. Anestezjologia Intensywna Terapia 2009;41(3):170‐5. [PUBMED: 19999607]

References to other published versions of this review

Derry 2010

Derry S, Faura C, Edwards J, McQuay HJ, Moore RA. Single dose dipyrone for acute postoperative pain. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010, Issue 11. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003227.pub2]

Characteristics of studies

Characteristics of included studies [ordered by study ID]

Bhounsule 1990

Methods

Randomised, double‐blind, placebo controlled, single oral dose. Study duration 6 h

Self assessment at 0, 0.5, 1.5, and 2 h, then hourly up to 6 h

Participants

Post‐episiotomy

N = 100

All F

Age: not reported

Baseline PI = severe

Interventions

Dipyrone 500 mg, n = 20

Ibuprofen 400 mg, n = 20

Paracetamol 600 mg, n = 20

Aspirin 600 mg, n = 20

Placebo, n = 20

Outcomes

PI: standard 4‐point scale (0 to 3)

PR: non‐standard 4‐point (1 to 4), standard wording, but non‐standard numbering

Adverse events

Notes

Oxford Quality Score: R1, DB1, W0. Total = 2/5

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Not reported

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Not reported

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

Method not described

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

Method not described

Size

High risk

< 50 participants per treatment arm

Boraks 1987

Methods

Randomised, double‐blind, placebo controlled, single oral dose. Study duration 6 h

Self assessment at 0, 0.5, and 1 h, then hourly up to 6 h

Participants

Dental extraction

N = 149

M 84, F 75

Mean age: 27 years

Baseline PI = moderate or severe

Interventions

Dipyrone 500 mg, n = 39

Aspirin 650 mg, n = 31

Flurbiprofen 50 mg, n = 40

Placebo, n = 39

Outcomes

PI: standard 4‐point scale (0 to 3)

PR: 5‐point scale (1 to 5) standard wording, but non‐standard numbering

PGE: standard 5‐point scale

Adverse events

Notes

Oxford Quality Score: R1, DB1, W0. Total = 2/5

Rescue medication allowed after 1 h

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Not reported

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Not reported

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

Method not described

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

Method not described

Size

High risk

< 50 participants per treatment arm

De Miguel Rivero 1997

Methods

Randomised, double‐blind, placebo controlled, single and multiple dose phases. IM route of administration for dipyrone and oral route for ibuprofen arginine, with double‐dummy placebo. Duration of single dose phase 5 h

Self assessment at 0, 0.25, 0.5, and 1 h, then hourly up to 5 h

Participants

Orthopaedic surgery ‐ total hip replacement

N = 106

M 48, F 58

Mean age 62 years

Baseline PI ≥ 50/100 mm

Interventions

Dipyrone 2000 mg IM, n = 35

Ibuprofen arginine 400 mg oral, n = 36

Placebo, n = 35

Outcomes

PI: 100 mm VAS (no pain to unbearable pain)

PGE: standard 5‐point scale

Use of rescue medication

Adverse events

Withdrawals

Notes

Oxford Quality Score: R1, DB2, W1. Total = 4/5

Rescue medication allowed after 1 h

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Not described

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Not described

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"Double dummy" design

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"Double dummy" design

Size

High risk

< 50 participants per treatment arm

Dos Santos Pereira 1986

Methods

Randomised, double‐blind, placebo controlled, single oral dose. Study duration 4 h

Self assessment at 0, 0.15, and 1 h, then hourly up to 4 h

Participants

Orthopaedic surgery

N = 85

M 57, F 28

Mean age 39 years

Baseline PI = moderate or severe

Interventions

Dipyrone 1000 mg, n = 28

Paracetamol 1000 mg, n = 28

Placebo, n = 29

Outcomes

PI: standard 4‐point scale (0 to 3)

PR: standard 5‐point scale (0 to 4)

PGE: non‐standard 4‐point scale

Use of rescue medication

Notes

Oxford Quality Score: R1, DB2, W0. Total = 3/5

Rescue medication allowed after 2 h

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Not reported

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Not reported

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Capsules of identical appearance

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Capsules of identical appearance

Size

High risk

< 50 participants per treatment arm

Olson 1999

Methods

Randomised, double‐blind, placebo controlled, single oral dose. Study duration 6 h

Self assessment at 0, 0.25, 0.5, 1.0, and 1.5 h and then hourly up to 6 h

Participants

Post‐episiotomy or 2nd degree vaginal tear

N = 108

All F

Mean age: 24 years

Baseline PI = severe

Interventions

Dipyrone 500 mg, n = 27

Ketoprofen 25 mg, n = 28

Ketoprofen 50 mg, n = 26

Placebo, n = 27

Outcomes

PI: standard 4‐point scale (0 to 3)

PR: standard 5‐point scale (0 to 4)

PGE: non‐standard 4‐point scale

Use of rescue medication

Adverse events

Withdrawals

Notes

Oxford Quality Score: R1, DB2, W1. Total = 4/5

Remedication was allowed after 1 h

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Not described

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

"individual randomisation envelope for each patient entering the study"

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Observation by different person to one giving treatment

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Observation by different person to one giving treatment

Size

High risk

< 50 participants per treatment arm

Pinto 1984

Methods

Randomised, double‐blind, placebo controlled, single oral dose. Study duration 4 h

Self assessment at 0, 0.5, and 1 h, and then hourly up to 4 h

Participants

Post‐tonsillectomy

N = 85

M 33, F 52

Mean age: 23 years

Baseline PI = moderate or severe

Interventions

Dipyrone 500 mg, n = 27

Paracetamol 500 mg, n = 29

Placebo, n = 29

Outcomes

PI: standard 4‐point scale (0 to 3)

PR: standard 5‐point scale (0 to 4)

PGE: non‐standard 4‐point scale

Use of rescue medication

Adverse events

Notes

Oxford Quality Score: R1, DB2, W0. Total = 3/5

Rescue medication allowed after 2 h

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Not reported

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Not reported

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Tablets identical in appearance

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Tablets identical in appearance

Size

High risk

< 50 participants per treatment arm

Rubinstein 1986

Methods

Randomised, double‐blind, placebo controlled, single oral dose. Study duration 4 h

Self assessment at 0, 0.5, and 1 h, and then hourly up to 4 h

Participants

Urological surgery

N = 90

M 60, F 30

Mean age 49 years

Baseline PI = moderate and severe

Interventions

Dipyrone 500 mg, n = 30

Paracetamol 500 mg, n = 30

Placebo, n = 30

Outcomes

PI: standard 4‐point scale (0 to 3)

PR: standard 5‐point scale (0 to 4)

PGE: non‐standard 4‐point scale

Use of rescue medication

Adverse events

Withdrawals

Notes

Oxford Quality Score: R1, DB2, W1. Total = 4/5

Rescue medication allowed after 2 h

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Not described

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Not described

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Capsules of identical appearance

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Capsules of identical appearance

Size

High risk

< 50 participants per treatment arm

Sakata 1986

Methods

Randomised, double‐blind, placebo controlled, single oral dose. Study duration 4 h

Self assessment at 0, 0.5, and 1 h, and then hourly up to 4 h

Participants

Mainly orthopaedic surgery

N = 86

M 49, F 37

Mean age: 32 years

Baseline PI = moderate and severe

Interventions

Dipyrone 1000 mg, n = 29

Paracetamol 1000 mg, n = 30

Placebo group, n = 27

Outcomes

PI: standard 4‐point scale (0 to 3)

PR: standard 5‐point (0 to 4)

PGE: non‐standard 4‐point scale

Notes

Oxford Quality Score: R1, DB1, W0. Total = 2/5

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Not reported

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Not reported

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

Method not described

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

Method not described

Size

High risk

< 50 participants per treatment arm

DB: double‐blind; F: female; h: hour; IM: intramuscular; M: male; N: number of participants in study; n: number of participants in treatment arm; PGE: Patient Global Evaluation; PI: pain intensity; PR: pain relief; R: randomised; VAS: visual analogue scale; W: withdrawals.

Characteristics of excluded studies [ordered by study ID]

Study

Reason for exclusion

Aizawa 1972

Not randomised

Bagan 1998

No placebo

Bosch 1990

Included children

Brodner 2011

Dipyrone given intra‐operatively

Casali 1981

Short study duration (3 h)

Castro 2000

Administered preoperatively

Daftary 1980

Number of participants with moderate or severe pain not stated; included mild pain; non‐standard PR scale used

Ferrario 1984

Baseline pain not measured. Non‐standard PI scale. Small size (N = 7)

Frantz 2009

Multiple doses; no single‐dose data

Gomez Jimenez 1980

Non‐standard PI scale

Gonzalez Garcia 1994

No placebo

Goutaine 1975

Not randomised or blind

Hernandez 1997

Not blind

Herrera Barroso 1982

Non‐standard PI and PR scales

Ibarra‐Ibarra 1993

No placebo

Lal 1973

Short study duration (30 minutes). Non‐standard PI and PR scales

Martin Duce 1997

Short study duration (1 h)

Mehta 1967

Not randomised or blinded

Mendl 1992

No placebo

Mukherjee 1980

Non‐standard scales

Noronha 2009

First dose administered preoperatively

Patel 1980

No placebo

Quiñones 1993

Did not present hourly pain outcome data

Reyes 1988

No single dose data

Rosas Pérez 1986

No placebo

Saray 2001

Baseline pain not measured. No single dose data

Sener 2008

Intraoperative administration, not established pain

Stankov 1995

No placebo

h: hour; N: number of participants in study; PI: pain intensity; PR: pain relief.

Data and analyses

Open in table viewer
Comparison 1. Oral dipyrone 500 mg versus placebo

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Participants with ≥ 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours Show forest plot

5

288

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.39 [1.84, 3.11]

Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Oral dipyrone 500 mg versus placebo, Outcome 1 Participants with ≥ 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours.

Comparison 1 Oral dipyrone 500 mg versus placebo, Outcome 1 Participants with ≥ 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours.

2 Participants using rescue medication over 4 to 6 hours Show forest plot

4

248

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.21 [0.11, 0.40]

Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Oral dipyrone 500 mg versus placebo, Outcome 2 Participants using rescue medication over 4 to 6 hours.

Comparison 1 Oral dipyrone 500 mg versus placebo, Outcome 2 Participants using rescue medication over 4 to 6 hours.

Study flow diagram.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 1

Study flow diagram.

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 2

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 3

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Oral dipyrone 500 mg versus placebo, outcome: 1.1 Participants with ≥ 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 4

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Oral dipyrone 500 mg versus placebo, outcome: 1.1 Participants with ≥ 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours.

Comparison 1 Oral dipyrone 500 mg versus placebo, Outcome 1 Participants with ≥ 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Oral dipyrone 500 mg versus placebo, Outcome 1 Participants with ≥ 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours.

Comparison 1 Oral dipyrone 500 mg versus placebo, Outcome 2 Participants using rescue medication over 4 to 6 hours.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Oral dipyrone 500 mg versus placebo, Outcome 2 Participants using rescue medication over 4 to 6 hours.

Oral dipyrone 500 mg compared with placebo for acute postoperative pain

Patient or population: adults with acute postoperative pain

Settings: clinic

Intervention: oral dipyrone 500 mg

Comparison: placebo

Outcomes

Probable outcome with

Relative effect and NNT or NNTp
(95% CI)

Number of studies, participants, events

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

intervention

comparator

At least 50% of maximum pain relief over 4 to 6 h

730 in 1000

320 in 1000

RR 2.4 (95% CI 1.8 to 3.1)

NNT 2.4 (1.9 to 3.1)

5 studies, 288 participants, 151 events

Moderate

Small studies, few events

Participants remedicating within 4 to 6 h

70 in 1000

340 in 1000

RR 0.21 (0.11 to 0.40)

NNTp 3.6 (2.7 to 5.4)

4 studies, 248 participants, 51 events

Low

Small studies, very few events

Participants with at least one adverse event

Insufficient data for analysis

Participants with a serious adverse event

None reported

None reported

5 studies, 288 participants, no events

Very low

Small studies, no events

CI: confidence interval; h: hour; RR: risk ratio; NNT: number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome; NNTp: number needed to treat to prevent an event.

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.
Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. Oral dipyrone 500 mg versus placebo

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Participants with ≥ 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours Show forest plot

5

288

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.39 [1.84, 3.11]

2 Participants using rescue medication over 4 to 6 hours Show forest plot

4

248

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.21 [0.11, 0.40]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. Oral dipyrone 500 mg versus placebo