Sublingual ketorolac and sublingual piroxicam are equally effective for postoperative pain, trismus, and swelling management in lower third molar removal

Objective. Lower third molar removal provides a clinical model for studying analgesic drugs. The present study's aim was to compare the clinical efficacy of sublingual ketorolac and sublingual piroxicam in managing pain, trismus and swelling after lower third molar extraction in adult volunteers. Study Design. In this double-blinded, randomized, crossover investigation, 47 volunteers received for 4 days ketorolac sublingually (10 mg 4 times daily) and piroxicam sublingually (20 mg once daily) during 2 separate appointments after lower third molar extraction of symmetrically positioned lower third molars. A surgeon evaluated objective parameters (surgery duration, mouth opening, rescue analgesic medication, and facial swelling) and volunteers documented subjective parameters (postoperative pain and global evaluation), comparing postoperative results for a total of 7 days after surgery. The means of the objective and subjective parameters were compared for statistical significance (P < .05). Results. Volunteers reported low pain scores during the postoperative period when treated with either sublingual ketorolac or piroxicam. Also, volunteers ingested similar amounts of analgesic rescue medication (paracetamol) when they received either drug sublingually (P > .05). Additionally, values for mouth openings measured just before surgery and immediately after suture removal 7 days later were similar among volunteers (P > .05), and the type of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug (NSAID) used in this study showed no significant differences between swellings on the second or seventh days after surgery (P > .05). Conclusions. Pain, trismus, and swelling after lower third molar extraction, independent of surgical difficulty, were successfully controlled by sublingual ketorolac (10 mg 4 times daily) or sublingual piroxicam (20 mg once daily), and no significant differences were observed between the NSAIDs evaluated. (Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2012;114:27-34)

Activation of central α(2)-adrenoceptors mediates salivary gland vasoconstriction

OBJECTIVE: Peripheral treatment with the cholinergic agonist pilocarpine increases salivary gland blood flow and induces intense salivation that is reduced by the central injection of moxonidine (α(2)-adrenoceptors/imidazoline agonist). In the present study, we investigated the effects of the intracerebroventricular (i.c.v.) injection of pilocarpine alone or combined with moxonidine also injected i.c.v. On submandibular/sublingual gland (SSG) vascular resistance. In addition, the effects of these treatments on arterial pressure, heart rate and on mesenteric and hindlimb vascular resistance were also tested. DESIGN: Male Holtzman rats with stainless steel cannula implanted into lateral ventricle and anaesthetized with urethane+α-chloralose were used. RESULTS: Pilocarpine (500nmol/1μl) injected i.c.v. Reduced SSG vascular resistance and increased arterial pressure, heart rate and mesenteric vascular resistance. Contrary to pilocarpine alone, the combination of moxonidine (20nmol/1μl) and pilocarpine injected i.c.v. Increased SSG vascular resistance, an effect abolished by the pre-treatment with the α(2)-adrenoceptor antagonist yohimbine (320nmol/2μl). The increase in arterial pressure, heart rate and mesenteric resistance was not modified by the combination of moxonidine and pilocarpine i.c.v. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that the activation of central α(2)-adrenoceptors may oppose to the effects of central cholinergic receptor activation in the SSG vascular resistance.