Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Multicentre, Randomised, Double- Blind Study Comparing the Efficacy and Tolerability of Intramuscular Dexketoprofen versus Diclofenac in the Symptomatic Treatment of Acute Low Back Pain

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

Abstract

Background: Low back pain is an important medical problem in Western industrialised countries. NSAIDs are one of the main options for symptomatic pain relief in the early management of this painful condition. Dexketoprofen is an NSAID belonging to the arylpropionic acid group that has demonstrated good analgesic efficacy and a good safety profile in different acute and chronic painful conditions.

Methods: A randomised, double-blind, parallel, active controlled, multicentre study that included 370 outpatients with acute low back pain was conducted to compare the analgesic efficacy of dexketoprofen 50mg twice daily versus diclofenac 75mg twice daily administered intramuscularly for 2 days. Efficacy outcomes were assessment of pain intensity (PI) measured on a visual analogue scale, total PI scores from baseline to 6 hours after the first-dose administration (primary efficacy endpoint; SAPID0-6), score on a physical disability scale using the Roland Disability Questionnaire (RDQ), and use of rescue medication. Tolerability and safety were also assessed as secondary variables.

Results: The adjusted mean (SAPID0-6) scores were very similar, 117.3 mm/h with dexketoprofen and 114.7 mm/h with diclofenac. The adjusted ratio of means was 1.023 and the lower 95% confidence limit was 0.81, demonstrating noninferiority of dexketoprofen (defined by a lower limit of the 95% CI >0.80) in comparison with diclofenac (per-protocol analysis). The median change in the RDQ was -6 points for both groups (p = 0.69), showing an overall improvement on the disability scale. No significant differences between groups were observed regarding the percentage of patients needing rescue medication or in the mean values of pain after repeated doses (SAPID0-last). Dexketoprofen was well tolerated, with a reported incidence of adverse events similar to that of diclofenac. No serious adverse events were reported in either treatment group.

Conclusion: From the results of this study it can be concluded that dexketoprofen 50mg administered twice daily intramuscularly provides a clinically relevant analgesic effect with good tolerability after single and repeated doses in patients with acute severe low back 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
Fig. 2
Table IV
Table V

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The use of trade names is for product identification purposes only and does not imply endorsement.

References

  1. Main CJ, Williams ACC. ABC of psychological medicine: musculoskeletal pain. BMJ 2002 Sep 7; 325(7363): 534–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Van Tulder MW, Scholten RJ, Koes BW, et al. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for low back pain: a systematic review within the framework of the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group. Spine 2000; 25: 2501–13

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Managing acute low back pain. Drug Ther Bull 1998 Dec; 36(12): 93–5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Deyo RA, Weinstein JN. Low back pain. N Engl J Med 2001 Feb 1;344(5): 363–70

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Dunn KM, Croft PR. Epidemiology and natural history of low back pain. Eura Medicophys 2004 Mar; 40(1): 9–13

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Koes BW, van Tulder MW, Ostelo R, et al. Clinical guidelines for the management of low back pain in primary care. Spine 2001 Nov 15; 26(22): 2504–13; 2513-4

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Bratton RL. Assessment and management of acute low back pain. Am Fam Physician 1999 Nov 15; 60(8): 2299–308

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Koes B, van Tudler M. Low back pain (acute). BMJ Clin Evid 2006; 6(15): 1619–33

    Google Scholar 

  9. Balagué F, Mannion AF, Pellisé F, et al. Clinical update: low back pain. Lancet 2007 Mar 3; 369(9563): 726–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Cassidy JD, Cote P, Caroll LJ, et al. Incidence and course of low back pain episodes in the general population. Spine 2005 Dec 15; 30(24): 2817–23

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Van Tulder M, Becker A, Bekkering T, et al. European guidelines for the management of acute non-specific low back pain in primary care. Chapter 3. Eur Spine J 2006 Mar; 15Suppl. 2: S169–91

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Burton KA, Waddell G, Tillotson M, et al. Information and advice to patients with back pain can have a positive effect: a randomized controlled trial of a novel educational booklet in primary care. Spine 1999 Dec 1; 24(23): 2484–91

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Roberts L, Little P, Chapman J, et al. The back home trial: general practitioner-supported leaflets may change back pain behaviour. Spine 2002 Sep 1; 27(17): 1821–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Babej-Dolle R, Freytag S, Eckmeyer J, et al. Parenteral dipyrone versus diclofenac and placebo in patients with acute lumbago or sciatic pain: randomized observer-blind multicenter study. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther 1994 Apr; 32(4): 204–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Mauleón D, Artigas R, Garcia ML, et al. Preclinical and clinical development of dexketoprofen trometamol. Drugs 1996; 52(5 Suppl.): 24–46

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hayball PJ, Nation RL, Bochner F, et al. Plasma protein binding of ketoprofen enantiomers in man: method development and its application. Chirality 1991; 3(6): 460–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Suesa N, Fernández MF, Gutiérrez M, et al. Stereoselective cyclooxygenase inhibition in cellular models by the enantiomers of ketoprofen. Chirality 1993; 5(8): 589–95

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Carabaza A, Cabré F, Rotllán E, et al. Stereoselective inhibition of inducible cyclooxygenase by chiral non-steroidal antiinflammatory drugs. J Clin Pharmacol 1996 Jun; 36(6): 505–12

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Cabré F, Fernández MF, Calvo L, et al. Analgesic, antiinflammatory and antipyretic effects of S(+)ketoprofen in vivo. J Clin Pharmacol 1998 Dec; 38(12 Suppl.): 3S–10S

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Barbanoj MJ, Gich I, Artigas R,et al. Pharmacokinetics of dexketoprofen trometamol in healthy volunteers after single and repeated oral doses. J Clin Pharmacol 1998 Dec; 38(12 Suppl.): 33S–40S

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Barbanoj MJ, Antonijoan RM, Gich I. Clinical pharmacokinetics of dexketoprofen. Clin Pharmacokinet 2001; 40(4): 245–62

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Vallés J, Artigas R, Créa A, et al. Clinical pharmacokinetics of parenteral dexketoprofen trometamol in healthy subjects. Methods Find Exp Clin Pharmacol 2006 Jun; 28Suppl. A: 7–12

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Gay C, Planas E, Donado M, et al. Analgesic efficacy of low doses of dexketoprofen trometamol in the dental pain model. Clin Drug Invest 1996; 11: 320–30

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. McGurk M, Robinson P, Rajayogeswaran V, et al. Clinical comparison of dexketoprofen trometamol, ketoprofen, and placebo in postoperative dental pain. J Clin Pharmacol 1998 Dec; 38(12 Suppl.): 46S–54S

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Bagán JV, López JS, Valencia E, et al. Clinical comparison of dexketoprofen trometamol and dipyrone in postoperative dental pain. J Clin Pharmacol 1998 Dec; 38(12 Suppl.): 55S–64S

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Ezcurdia M, Cortejoso FJ, Lanzón R, et al. Comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of dexketoprofen and ketoprofen in the treatment of primary dysmenorrhea. J Clin Pharmacol 1998 Dec; 38(12 Suppl.): 65S–73S

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Beltrán J, Mart ín-Mola E, Figueroa M, et al. Comparison of dexketoprofen trometamol and ketoprofen in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee. J Clin Pharmacol 1998 Dec; 38(12 Suppl.): 74S–80S

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Marenco JL, Pérez M, Navarro FJ, et al. A multicentre, randomised, double-blind study to compare the efficacy and tolerability of dexketoprofen trometamol versus diclofenac in the symptomatic treatment of knee osteoarthritis. Clin Drug Invest 2000; 19: 247–56

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Rodríguez MJ, Contreras D, Gálvez R, et al. Double-blind evaluation of short-term analgesic efficacy of orally administered dexketoprofen trometamol and ketorolac in bone cancer pain. Pain 2003; 104(1-2): 103–10

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Sánchez-Carpena J, Sesma-Sánchez J, Sánchez-Juan C, et al. Comparison of dexketoprofen trometamol and dipyrone in the treatment of renal colic. Clin Drug Invest 2003; 23(3): 139–52

    Google Scholar 

  31. Sánchez-Carpena J, Domínguez-Hervella F, García I, et al. Intravenous dexketoprofen versus dipyrone followed by an oral treatment in acute renal colic [abstract no. 24]. 36th Pain Society Annual Scientific Meeting; 2003 Apr 1–4; Glasgow

  32. Miralles F, Zapata A, Mas M, et al. Morphine sparing effect of dexketoprofen trometamol when used in the treatment of postoperative pain after major abdominal surgery [abstract no. 316]. International Association for the study of Pain (IASP). 10th World Congress on Pain; 2002 Aug 17–22; San Diego (CA)

  33. Hanna MH, Elliott KM, Stuart-Taylor ME, et al. Comparative study of analgesic efficacy and morphine-sparing effect of intramuscular dexketoprofen trometamol with ketoprofen or placebo after major orthopaedic surgery. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2003; 55(2): 126–33

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Zippel H, Wagenitz A. Comparison of the efficacy and safety of intravenously administered dexketoprofen trometamol and ketoprofen in the management of pain after orthopaedic surgery. Clin Drug Invest 2006; 26(9): 517–28

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Colberg K, Hettich M, Sigmund R, et al. The efficacy and tolerability of an 8-day administration of intravenous and oral meloxicam: a comparison with intramuscular and oral diclofenac in patients with acute lumbago. German Meloxicam Ampoule Study Group. Curr Med Res Opin 1996; 13(7): 363–77

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Agrifoglio E, Benbenuti M, Gatto P, et al. Aceclofenac: a new NSAID in the treatment of acute lumbago. Multicentre single blind study vs diclofenac. Acta Ther 1994; 20: 33–45

    Google Scholar 

  37. Roland M, Fairbank J. The Roland-Morris disability questionnaire and the Oswestry questionnaire. Spine 2000 Dec 15; 25(24): 3115–24

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Kolman J, Meng P, Graeme S (editors). Good clinical practice. New York (NY): John Wiley and Sonds Ltd; 1998

    Book  Google Scholar 

  39. EuropeanMedicines Agency. ICH Topic E9. Note for guidance on statistical principles for clinical trials (CPMP/ICH/363/96). London: 1998 September

  40. MedDRA USA 2007 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.meddramsso.com/MMSOweb/index/htm [Accessed 2007 Jun 1]

  41. Liddle SD, Gracey JH, Baxter GD. Advice for the management of low back pain: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Man Ther. Epub 2007 Mar 27

  42. Collins SL, Morre RA, McQuay HJ. The visual analogue pain intensity scale: what is moderate pain in millimeters? Pain 1997 Aug; 72(1-2): 95–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Garbe E, Röhmel J, Gundert-Remy U. Clinical and statistical issues in therapeutic equivalence trials. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1993; 45(1): 1–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Ostelo RW, de Vet HC. Clinically important outcomes in low back pain. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 2005 Aug; 19(4): 593–607

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Fosslien E. Adverse effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs on the gastrointestinal system. Ann Clin Lab Sci 1998 Mar–Apr; 28(2): 67–81

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Singh G, Ramey DR. NSAID induced gastrointestinal complications: the ARAMIS perspective-1997. J Rheumatol 1998; 25Suppl. 51: 8–16

    Google Scholar 

  47. Scheiman JM. NSAIDS and GI injury: I. Epidemiology and pathogenesis. Drugs Today 1997; 33: 499–508

    Google Scholar 

  48. Yakhno N, Guekht A, Skoromets A, et al. Analgesic efficacy and safety of lornoxicam quick-release formulation compared with diclofenac potassium. Clin Drug Invest 2006; 26(5): 267–77

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Ximenes A, Robles M, Sands G, et al. Valdecoxib is as efficacious as diclofenac in the treatment of acute low back pain. Clin J Pain 2007 Mar–Apr; 23(3): 244–50

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Matsumo S, Kaneda K, Nohara Y. Clinical evaluation of ketoprofen (Orudis) in lumbago: a double-blind comparison with diclofenac sodium. Br J Clin Pract 1981 Jul–Aug; 35(7-8): 266

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Leman P, Kapadia Y, Herington J. Randomised controlled trial of the onset of analgesic efficacy of dexketoprofen and diclofenac in lower limb injury. Emerg Med J 2003 Nov; 20(6): 511–3

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The results of this study were presented in part at the 10th World Congress on Pain, 17–22 August 2002, San Diego, California, USA.

This study was financially supported by a grant from Menarini Ricerche SpA, Florence, Italy. The authors have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this study. The authors thank Silvia Garrido for technical support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedics, Charité-University Medicine, Berlin, Germany

    H. Zip-pel &  A. Wagenitz

Authors
  1. H. Zip-pel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. Wagenitz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. Wagenitz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zip-pel, H., Wagenitz, A. A Multicentre, Randomised, Double- Blind Study Comparing the Efficacy and Tolerability of Intramuscular Dexketoprofen versus Diclofenac in the Symptomatic Treatment of Acute Low Back Pain. Clin. Drug Investig. 27, 533–543 (2007). https://doi.org/10.2165/00044011-200727080-00002

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00044011-200727080-00002

Keywords

Search

Navigation