OBJECTIVE: Tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy are common surgical procedures that cause persistent pain, bleeding, and functional limitations. We aimed to investigate the efficacy of celecoxib compared with a placebo for managing post-tonsillectomy or adenoidectomy pain and other adverse events.
METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search in the PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases from inception until July 2023. Dichotomous outcomes have been reported as risk ratios (RR) while continuous outcomes were reported using mean differences (MD). A funnel plot was drawn to investigate publication bias.
RESULTS: From 1394 records identified, 6 randomised double-blind trials comprising 591 participants undergoing tonsillectomy and/or adenoidectomy were eligible for inclusion. A high dose (400 mg) of celecoxib was effective in decreasing the pain score for \'worst pain\' after the procedure (MD: -10.98, [95% CI: -11.53, -10.42], p < .01, I2 = 0%) while a low dose (200 mg) was not significantly effective (p = 0.31). For managing other outcomes such as vomiting (RR: 1.37 [95% CI: 0.69, 2.68], p = 0.37, I2 = 67%), diarrhoea (RR: 1.41, [95% CI: 0.75, 2.64], p = .29, I2 = 42%), dizziness/drowsiness (RR: 0.90, [95% CI: 0.71, 1.15], p = .48, I2 = 0%), functional recovery time (p = .74), and headache (p = .91), there was no significant difference between the group on celecoxib and the placebo group regardless of dosage. Finally, there was no significant difference (RR: 1.02, [95% CI: 0.91, 1.15], p = .69, I2 = 0%) in the effect of the intervention on minimum bleeding, moderate bleeding, and profuse bleeding.
CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis provides robust evidence pooled from high-quality trials and raises questions about the efficacy of celecoxib for tonsillectomy and/or adenoidectomy, challenging existing perceptions.

The use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for a wide range of diseases is increasing, in part due to an increasing elderly population. Elderly patients are more vulnerable to adverse drug reactions, including side effects and adverse effects of drug-drug interactions, often occurring in this category of patients due to multimorbidity and polypharmacy. One of the most popular NSAIDs in the world is celecoxib. It is a selective cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitor with 375 times more COX-2 inhibitory activity than COX-1. As a result, celecoxib has a better gastrointestinal tract safety profile than non-selective NSAIDs. Gastrointestinal tolerance is an essential factor that physicians should consider when selecting NSAIDs for elderly patients. Celecoxib can be used in a wide range of diseases of the musculoskeletal system and rheumatological diseases, for the treatment of acute pain in women with primary dysmenorrhea, etc. It is also increasingly used as part of a multimodal perioperative analgesia regimen. There is strong evidence that COX-2 is actively involved in the pathogenesis of ischemic brain damage, as well as in the development and progression of neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer\'s disease. NSAIDs are first-line therapy in the treatment of acute migraine attacks. Celecoxib is well tolerated in patients with risk factors for NSAID-associated nephropathy. It does not decrease the glomerular filtration rate in elderly patients and patients with chronic renal failure. Many meta-analyses and epidemiological studies have not confirmed the increased risk of cardiovascular events reported in previous clinical studies and have not shown an increased risk of cardiovascular events with celecoxib, irrespective of dose. COX-2 activation is one of the key factors contributing to obesity-related inflammation. Specific inhibition of COX-2 by celecoxib increases insulin sensitivity in overweight or obese patients. Combination therapies may be a promising new area of treatment for obesity and diabetes.
Использование нестероидных противовоспалительных препаратов (НПВП) в качестве лекарственной терапии широкого спектра заболеваний растет, отчасти – из-за увеличения численности пожилого населения. Пациенты пожилого возраста отличаются повышенной уязвимостью для нежелательных реакций от лекарственных средств, включая побочные эффекты и неблагоприятные последствия межлекарственных взаимодействий, часто встречающихся у данной категории пациентов в связи с полиморбидностью и полипрагмазией. Одним из наиболее популярных в мире НПВП является целекоксиб. Это селективный ингибитор циклооксигеназы (ЦОГ)-2, ингибирующее действие которого на ЦОГ-2 в 375 раз сильнее, чем на ЦОГ-1. Благодаря этому целекоксиб имеет более высокий профиль безопасности для желудочно-кишечного тракта по сравнению с неселективными НПВП. Переносимость со стороны желудочно-кишечного тракта является важным фактором, который врачи должны учитывать при выборе НПВП для пациентов пожилого возраста. Целекоксиб можно применять при широком спектре заболеваний опорно-двигательного аппарата и ревматологических заболеваниях, для лечения острой боли у женщин при первичной дисменорее. Он также все чаще используется как часть мультимодального режима периоперационного обезболивания. Появляются убедительные доказательства того, что ЦОГ-2 активно участвует в патогенезе ишемического повреждения головного мозга, а также в развитии и прогрессировании нейродегенеративных заболеваний, таких как болезнь Альцгеймера. НПВП являются терапией 1-й линии при лечении острых приступов мигрени. Целекоксиб хорошо переносится пациентами, имеющими факторы риска развития НПВП-ассоциированной нефропатии. Данный препарат не вызывает снижения скорости клубочковой фильтрации у больных пожилого возраста и пациентов с хронической почечной недостаточностью. Многочисленные метаанализы и эпидемиологические исследования не подтвердили повышенный риск сердечно-сосудистых осложнений, наблюдавшийся в предыдущих клинических исследованиях, и не выявили повышения риска сердечно-сосудистых заболеваний при приеме целекоксиба независимо от дозировки. Активация ЦОГ-2 является одним из ключевых факторов, способствующих воспалению, связанному с ожирением. Специфическое ингибирование ЦОГ-2 целекоксибом повышает чувствительность к инсулину у пациентов с избыточной массой тела или ожирением. Использование комбинированной терапии может стать новой многообещающей областью лечения ожирения и сахарного диабета.

Treatment of locally advanced oral cancer requires multidisciplinary care, including surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy, which varies based on the stage of the disease, site of involvement, and surgical access. Oral cancer usually presents with an increased recurrence rate and potential for distant metastatic spread. It confers a poor prognosis with a 50% mortality rate after five years. Oral metronomic chemotherapy aims to achieve higher patient compliance due to its ease of administration, lower dosage, and lesser side effects than conventional IV regimens of platinum-based drugs. In this review, we have summarized the relevant literature to benefit the readers regarding the potential application of metronomic therapy in the management of oral cancer.

Due to the large cost of joint replacement for surgical treatment of knee osteoarthritis, there are many complications in elderly patients, and there are many contraindications to surgery, and conservative treatment is still based on drugs. To further evaluate the efficacy and safety of sodium hyaluronate combined with celecoxib for the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee. In total, 202 studies were screened, with a final selection of 9 RCTs involving 2339 participants; of these, 9 RCTs were included in the final meta-analysis. Treatment group reduces VAS (SMD = -1.61; 95 % CI [-2.25, -0.98]; I2 = 95 %; P < 0.00001) and adverse reactions (OR = 0.45; 95 % CI [0.22,0.94]; I2 = 0 %; P < 0.33); Meanwhile, improving Lysholm knee scores (SMD = 0.19; 95 % CI [-0.06, -0.44]; I2 = 76 %; P = 0.0004) and Clinical efficiency (OR = 0.31; 95 % CI [0.19,0.50]; I2 = 0 %; P < 0.00001). All indicators were superior to the control group. Our primary findings suggest that KOA treatment with celecoxib combined with sodium hyaluronate reduces VAS, while improving Lysholm scores and Clinical efficiency. In addition, we found that celecoxib combined with sodium hyaluronate treatment had fewer adverse effects than the control group, indicating that the combination is safe and effective in the treatment of KOA.

Cancer cachexia (CC) is a multifactorial syndrome driven by inflammation, defined by ongoing loss of skeletal muscle mass (with or without loss of fat mass) that cannot be fully reversed by conventional nutritional support. CC leads to progressive functional impairment, with its clinical management complicated and limited therapeutic options available. The objective of this review was to assess the efficacy and safety of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) on patient-centred outcomes in patients with CC. In 2013, two systematic reviews concluded that there was insufficient evidence to recommend NSAIDs for clinical management of CC outside of clinical trials. However, clinical trials of multi-component CC interventions have included NSAIDs as an intervention component, so an up-to-date assessment of the evidence for NSAIDs in the treatment of CC is warranted. Four databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL and CINAHL) and three trial registers (clinicaltrials.gov, WHO ICTRP and ISRCTN) were searched on 16 December 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any NSAID (any dose or duration) with a control arm, in adult patients with CC, reporting measures of body weight, body composition, nutrition impact symptoms, inflammation, physical function or fatigue, were eligible for inclusion. Primary outcomes (determined with patient involvement) were survival, changes in muscle strength, body composition, body weight and quality of life. Included studies were assessed for risk of bias using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. Five studies were included, which investigated Indomethacin (n = 1), Ibuprofen (n = 1) and Celecoxib (n = 3). Four studies were judged to be at high risk of bias for all outcomes, with one study raising concerns for most outcomes. Considerable clinical and methodological heterogeneity amongst the studies meant that meta-analysis was not appropriate. There was insufficient evidence to determine whether Indomethacin or Ibuprofen is effective or safe for use in patients with CC; RCTs with lower risk of bias are needed. Celecoxib studies indicated it was safe for use in this population at the doses tested (200-400 mg/day) but found contrasting results regarding efficacy, potentially reflecting heterogeneity amongst the studies. There is inadequate evidence to recommend any NSAID for CC. While current clinical trials for CC treatments are shifting towards multi-component interventions, further research to determine the efficacy and safety of NSAIDs alone is necessary if they are to be included in such multi-component interventions. Furthermore, the lack of data on patient-determined primary outcomes in this review highlights the need for patient involvement in clinical trials for CC.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of selective COX-2 inhibitors in preventing colorectal cancer recurrence has been demonstrated, however it is unknown how safe and successful they will be over the long term. As a result, we looked at the efficacy, safety, and consequences of adding COX-2 inhibitors to the treatment plan afterward.
METHODS: In patients with advanced colorectal cancer, we compared the efficacy of celecoxib at two different doses (200 mg twice day and 400 mg twice daily) with placebo. To evaluate the impacts of post-treatment, several datasets from inception to June 2022 were searched. Response rate, illness control rate, and 3-year survival were the main results. And evaluated several safety outcomes, particularly those that were susceptible to adverse events.
RESULTS: The study comprised a total of 9 randomized controlled trials (3206 participants). Celecoxib and rofecoxib doidn\'t significantly improved the 1-3 year remission rate (OR, 1.57 [95% CI: 0.95-2.57]) and disease control rate (OR, 1.08 [95% CI: 0.99-1.17]). Subgroup analysis of different doses showed that 400 mg of celecoxib significantly improved the response rate (OR, 2.82 [95%CI: 1.20-6.61]). 200 mg celecoxib was not significant (OR, 1.28 [95% CI: 0.66-2.49]). Rofecoxib also did not fully improve disease response rates. Celecoxib at any dose improved 3-year survival (OR, 1.21 [95% CI: 1.02-1.45]). It is important to note that COX-2 inhibitors did not significantly enhance the likelihood of adverse events including gastrointestinal or cardiovascular side effects at any dose.
CONCLUSIONS: For patients with advanced colorectal cancer, a reasonable chemoprevention regimen can include celecoxib 400 mg twice daily.

Transdermal buprenorphine (TBUP) may have some advantages for the management of acute postoperative pain. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the efficacy and safety of TBUP compared to other analgesics or placebo for acute postoperative pain. A systematic search was conducted using Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) until December 26, 2022. The search included randomized controlled trials comparing TBUP versus other analgesics or placebo for acute postoperative pain. A certainty assessment was conducted using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) method. The protocol for this review was registered on Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42022318601). In total, 15 studies involving 1,205 participants were included that compared TBUP versus fentanyl (n = 2), celecoxib (n = 3), placebo (n = 2), tramadol (n = 5), diclofenac (n = 3), parecoxib (n = 1), and flurbiprofen (n = 1). Meta-analyses were conducted for 3 comparators that involved 2 studies each. There was no significant difference in pain between TBUP 10 mcg/h versus fentanyl 25 mcg/h (standardized mean difference [SMD] -.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] -.86 to .81, P = .95, I2 = 85%). TBUP 10 mcg/h was associated with less pain compared to celecoxib 200 mg twice daily (SMD -.32, 95% CI -.58 to -.05, P = .02, I2 = 0%) and placebo (SMD -2.29, 95% CI -4.32 to -.27, P = .03, I2 = 94%). The GRADE assessment showed a very low certainty of evidence for all comparisons. There is insufficient evidence that TBUP improves pain control compared to other analgesics for acute postoperative pain. PERSPECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the use of TBUP to other analgesics for postoperative pain. The results showed that there is insufficient evidence to recommend the use of TBUP in this setting. The findings will help clinicians select the most appropriate opioid regimens for postoperative pain.

Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a global health problem, and gabapentin and pregabalin are often used in the treatment of patients without associated radiculopathy or neuropathy. Therefore, determining their efficacy and safety is of enormous value.
To examine the efficacy and safety of using gabapentin and pregabalin for CLBP without radiculopathy or neuropathy.
We performed a search on the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, and Web of Science data bases for clinical trials, cohorts, and case-control studies that evaluated patients with CLBP without radiculopathy or neuropathy for at least eight weeks. The data were extracted and inserted into a previously-prepared Microsoft Excel spreadsheet; the outcomes were evaluated using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool, and the quality of evidence, using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system.
Of the 2,230 articles identified, only 5 were included, totaling 242 participants. In them, pregabalin was slightly less efficacious than amitriptyline, the combination of tramadol/acetaminophen, and celecoxib, and pregabalin added to celecoxib showed no benefit when compared to celecoxib alone (very low evidence for all). On the other hand, although one study with gabapentin did not support its use in a general sample of patients with low back pain, another found a reduction in the pain scale and improved mobility (moderate evidence). No serious adverse events were observed in any of the studies.
Quality information to support the use of pregabalin or gabapentin in the treatment of CLBP without radiculopathy or neuropathy is lacking, although results may suggest gabapentin as a viable option. More data is needed to fill this current gap in knowledge.
Dor lombar crônica (DLC) é um problema de saúde global, e a gabapentina e a pregabalina são frequentemente utilizadas no tratamento de pacientes sem radiculopatia ou neuropatia associada. Por isso, determinar sua eficácia e segurança é de enorme valor.
Examinar a eficácia e segurança do uso de gabapentina e pregabalina no tratamento da DLC sem radiculopatia ou neuropatia. MéTODOS:  Realizamos uma pesquisa nas bases de dados CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS e Web of Science por ensaios clínicos, coortes e estudos de caso e controle que avaliassem pacientes com DLC sem radiculopatia ou neuropatia por pelo menos oito semanas. Os dados foram extraídos e inseridos em uma planilha previamente elaborada no programa Microsoft Excel; os desfechos foram avaliados com a ferramenta RoB 2 tool da Cochrane, e a qualidade das evidências, pelo sistema Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).
Dos 2.230 artigos identificados, apenas 5 foram incluídos, com um total de 242 participantes. Neles, a pregabalina foi ligeiramente menos eficaz do que a amitriptilina, a combinação de tramadol/acetaminofeno, e o celecoxibe, assim como a pregabalina adicionada ao celecoxibe não mostrou benefício em comparação ao uso isolado de celecoxibe (evidência muito baixa para todos). Quanto à gabapentina, embora um estudo não respalde seu uso para uma amostra geral de pacientes com lombalgia, outro encontrou redução na escala de dor e melhora da mobilidade (evidência moderada). Nenhum evento adverso grave foi observado nos estudos. CONCLUSãO:  Há carência de informações de qualidade que sustentem o uso de pregabalina ou gabapentina no tratamento da DLC sem radiculopatia ou neuropatia, embora resultados possam sugerir que a gabapentina é uma opção viável. Mais dados são necessários para preencher essa atual lacuna no conhecimento.

The effects of celecoxib on a broad spectrum of mood disorders and on inflammatory parameters have not yet been comprehensively evaluated. The aim of this study was to systematically summarize the available knowledge on this topic. Data from both preclinical and clinical studies were analyzed, considering the efficacy and safety of celecoxib in the treatment of mood disorders, as well as the correlation of inflammatory parameters with the effect of celecoxib treatment. Forty-four studies were included. We found evidence supporting the antidepressant efficacy of celecoxib in a dose of 400 mg/day used for 6 weeks as an add-on treatment in major depression (SMD = -1.12 [95%Cl: -1.71,-0.52], p = 0.0002) and mania (SMD = -0.82 [95% CI:-1.62,-0.01], p = 0.05). The antidepressant efficacy of celecoxib in the above dosage used as sole treatment was also confirmed in depressed patients with somatic comorbidity (SMD = -1.35 [95% CI:-1.95,-0.75], p < 0.0001). We found no conclusive evidence for the effectiveness of celecoxib in bipolar depression. Celecoxib at a dose of 400 mg/d used for up to 12 weeks appeared to be a safe treatment in patients with mood disorders. Although an association between celecoxib response and inflammatory parameters has been found in preclinical studies, this has not been confirmed in clinical trials. Further studies are needed to evaluate the efficacy of celecoxib in bipolar depression, as well as long-term studies evaluating the safety and efficacy of celecoxib in recurrent mood disorders, studies involving treatment-resistant populations, and assessing the association of celecoxib treatment with inflammatory markers.

Cesarean section is associated with moderate to severe pain and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly employed. The optimal NSAID, however, has not been elucidated. In this network meta-analysis and systematic review, we compared the influence of control and individual NSAIDs on the indices of analgesia, side effects, and quality of recovery.
CDSR, CINAHL, CRCT, Embase, LILACS, PubMed, and Web of Science were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing a specific NSAID to either control or another NSAID in elective or emergency cesarean section under general or neuraxial anesthesia. Network plots and league tables were constructed, and the quality of evidence was evaluated with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) analysis.
We included 47 trials. Cumulative intravenous morphine equivalent consumption at 24 h, the primary outcome, was examined in 1,228 patients and 18 trials, and control was found to be inferior to diclofenac, indomethacin, ketorolac, and tenoxicam (very low quality evidence owing to serious limitations, imprecision, and publication bias). Indomethacin was superior to celecoxib for pain score at rest at 8-12 h and celecoxib + parecoxib, diclofenac, and ketorolac for pain score on movement at 48 h. In regard to the need for and time to rescue analgesia COX-2 inhibitors such as celecoxib were inferior to other NSAIDs.
Our review suggests the presence of minimal differences among the NSAIDs studied. Nonselective NSAIDs may be more effective than selective NSAIDs, and some NSAIDs such as indomethacin might be preferable to other NSAIDs.