Urology
Volume 72, Issue 5 , Pages 987-990, November 2008

Role of Papaverine Hydrochloride Administration in Patients With Intractable Renal Colic: Randomized Prospective Trial

Department of Urology, Yeditepe University Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey

Received 11 May 2008; accepted 4 July 2008. published online 12 September 2008.

Objectives

To evaluate the therapeutic effect of papaverine hydrochloride in the treatment of patients with renal colic pain unresponsive to conventional treatment.

Methods

From March 2007 to January 2008, a total of 561 patients with severe renal colic pain due to a ureteral stone were treated with conventional agents (hyoscine-N-butylbromide and diclofenac sodium) in the emergency and urology departments. Of these 561 patients, 110, with no response to the treatment and persistent severe pain, were randomized into 3 groups for additional treatment. The patients in group 1 (n = 37) received intravenous hyoscine-N-butylbromide, those in group 2 (n = 37) received papaverine hydrochloride, and those in group 3 (n = 36) received pethidine. Before and after treatment, all patients completed a visual analog scale (VAS) questionnaire, with a scale of 0 (no pain) to 10 (maximal complaint), to measure their subjective pain. The mean VAS score of each group was compared with that of the other groups.

Results

The pretreatment mean VAS scores of all 3 groups were not significantly different statistically from each other (4.02 ± 1.20, 4.36 ± 1.97, and 4.27 ± 1.50; P > .05). However, after treatment, the mean VAS scores of the patients treated with papaverine (0.93 ± 0.29) and pethidine (0.81 ± 0.38) were significantly different from those of the hycosine group (3.67 ± 2.21; P < .001). However, the mean VAS scores of groups 2 and 3 were comparable (P = .67). Unlike opioids, no papaverine-related severe side effects were observed.

Conclusions

Our results indicate that papaverine hydrochloride can used in an effective manner in the management of renal colic pain in patients unresponsive to commonly used conventional agents.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0090-4295(08)00903-5

doi:10.1016/j.urology.2008.07.030

Urology
Volume 72, Issue 5 , Pages 987-990, November 2008