J. Chrubasik

Treatment with herbal medicines is very popular in Europe. In order to get information on the evidence of effectiveness of oral herbal medicines in the treatment of pain in the joints or lower back, OVID(MEDLINE), PUBMED and COCHRANE COLLABORATION LIBRARY were searched back to 1985 for systematic reviews. The level of evidence of effectiveness was defined as strong - at least two confirmatory studies demonstrating a clinical relevant effect, moderate - one confirmatory study with a clinical relevant effect and/or multiple exploratory studies of good quality; otherwise the evidence was insufficient or conflicting in the case of inconsistent findings. Fifteen systematic reviews were identified. The evidence of effectiveness was strong for a proprietary unsaponifiable avocado soybean fraction and Harpagophytum preparations containing > 50 mg harpagoside in the daily dosage, moderate for ginger and a proprietary rose hip and seed powder, insufficient for Boswellia serrata gum resin and other herbal preparations and inconsistent for a proprietary willow bark extract. Further rigorous studies are required to confirm the usefulness of herbal medicines in the treatment of osteoarthritic complaints and chronic low back pain in order to enable acceptance of the herbal medicines into the treatment guidelines.

This study was a multinational, multicentre, double-blind, active controlled phase III trial designed to investigate efficacy and safety of 300 mg acetylsalicyclic acid (ASA) (n = 135) vs. 200 mg metoprolol (n = 135) in the prophylaxis of migraine. In total 270 (51 male and 219 female) patients, aged 18-65 years, suffering between two and six migraine attacks per month were recruited. The main objective was to show equivalence with respect to efficacy, defined as a 50% reduction in the rate of migraine attacks. A run-in phase was carried out with placebo for 4 weeks, followed by a 16-week drug phase. In both treatment groups the median frequency of migraine attacks improved during the study period, from three to two in the ASA group and from three to one in the metoprolol group; 45.2% of all metoprolol patients were responders compared with 29.6% with ASA. Medication-related adverse events were less frequent in the ASA group (37) than in the metoprolol group (73). The findings from this trial show that metoprolol is superior to ASA for migraine prophylaxis but has more side-effects. Acetylsalicylic acid is better tolerated than metoprolol. Using a strict responder criterion ASA showed a responder rate comparable with the placebo rate in the literature.

The epidural injection of a bolus of 250 micrograms somatostatin followed by continuous epidural infusion provided complete postoperative relief of pain in eight patients who had undergone abdominal surgery; no other analgesics were required. In two patients, intravenous and intramuscular naloxone had no effect on the analgesia provided by epidural somatostatin. In two patients, epidural somatostatin also produced adequate intraoperative analgesia. Epidural somatostatin was associated with no side effects.