Meperidine (pethidine) versus morphine in acute pain management of opioid-dependent patients

Hassan Solhi,1 Hossein Sanaei-Zadeh,2 Sadra Solhi,1 Mohammad Ali Azizi Nadian,1 Morteza Gharibi,3 Bahman Sadeghi Sedeh4 1Department of Internal Medicine, Arak University of Medical Sciences, Arak, 2Emergency Room, Division of Medical Toxicology, Hazrat Ali-Asghar (p) Hospital, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, 3Department of Emergency Medicine, Arak University of Medical Sciences, 4Department of Social Medicine, Arak University of Medical Sciences, Arak, Iran Abstract: The present study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of morphine and meperidine (pethidine) as pain relief in opioid-dependent patients with acute pain. A total of 122 opioid-dependent patients with acute pain were included in the study. Their pain severity was assessed, using visual analog scale (VAS) scores ranging from 0 to 10. The patients randomly received intravenous morphine (up to 0.15 mg/kg) or meperidine (up to 1.5 mg/kg) for pain control by patient control analgesia (PCA) pump. The clinical opioid withdrawal scale (COWS) was employed for the assessment of withdrawal symptoms. The pain relief and the emergence of withdrawal symptoms were measured at 15, 30, and 60 minutes after drug administration. The patients who received morphine reported a better pain control compared to those who received meperidine (mean ± standard deviation [SD] VAS scores 4.11±1.90 vs 5.85±2.08 at the end of the study; P<0.001). On the other hand, the patients who received meperidine indicated prominent withdrawal symptoms (mean ± SD COWS scores 4.80±2.18 vs. 1.98±0.82 at the end of the study; P<0.001). Our findings revealed that morphine can be recommended in acute pain management of opioid-dependent patients. In addition, emergency physicians should ask their patients about any drug dependence before selecting the appropriate drug for their acute pain management. Keywords: pain management, meperidine, morphine, opioid dependency, withdrawal symptom

Prevalence of Charles Bonnet syndrome in patients with age-related macular degeneration : systematic review and meta-analysis

Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is the most common cause of visual impairment in the developed world. A number of patients experience complex lifelike visual experiences—Charles Bonnet syndrome (CBS). In this systematic review, our aim was to provide an overview of the CBS literature in relation to AMD, to determine the prevalence of CBS in patients with AMD and to provide an overview of associated demographical and clinical aspects. We searched the literature databases PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central, and PsycINFO on 22 March 2019 for studies evaluating the prevalence of CBS in patients with AMD. Two independent authors extracted the data and evaluated risk of bias. Studies were reviewed qualitatively in the text and quantitatively in a meta-analysis including subgroup analyses for differences between demographic and clinical factors. We identified 18 studies with data on >4303 patients with AMD. We found an overall prevalence of CBS of 15.8% (95% confidence interval: 11.0%–21.2%). When looking at consecutively recruited patients with neovascular AMD from the clinic, prevalence of CBS was 7.2% (95% confidence interval: 4.3%–10.6%). Among visitors to visual rehabilitation centres, prevalence of CBS was 31.6% (95% confidence interval: 21.7%–42.3%). Taken together, we find that CBS is rather common in patients with AMD