Background: Chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) are old drugs used against malaria, rheumatism, inflammation in the joints, lupus, among others. These drugs showed positive results in preliminary scientific research for treatment of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). Since the studies with CQ and HCQ are initial with small patient populations, it is not yet known whether there are adverse effects from the use of CQ and HCQ for patients infected with the coronavirus. Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of CQ and HCQ used against viral infection caused by SARS-CoV-2. Study Design: This is a narrative review of the traditional prescriptions of CQ and HCQ efficacy and adverse effects as well as their employment for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Setting: In vitro and clinical studies comparing the antiviral efficacy and adverse effect profile of CQ and HCQ against COVID-19 in adult patients were evaluated. Methods: A systemic search of reviews, including in vitro and clinical trial studies in English focusing on CQ and HCQ effects and adverse effects against COVID-19 in the adult patient population from PubMed was performed. It included studies reporting chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine effects and adverse effects against COVID-19. Results: A total of 42 articles published between 2004 and April 2020 were reviewed for therapeutic use of CQ and HCQ. Both these drugs showed a significant in vitro potential against coronavirus. Many studies for clinical use of CQ and HCQ showed that patients presented adverse reactions on high doses. Limitations: Clinical studies have some methodology shortcomings, such as lack of information about the treatment and small number of experimental patients, leading to a misinterpretation of the data. Besides, there are few clinical studies with a limited sample size. Moreover, most of them did not present control groups, and some patients had died during these protocols. Discussion: Despite both CQ and HCQ in vitro antiviral evidence, clinically, both drugs, either alone or combined with other medications, may increase the risk of cardiac arrhythmias, leading to cardiac arrest and sudden death. Besides, a lot of uncertainty still remains, such as starting administration period, dose prescribed, length of treatment, patients’ condition, concomitant drug use, among others. Conclusion: From the studies reviewed, it is not possible to state the precise efficacy and safety of CQ and HCQ use in the treatment of COVID-19 at any time in the course of the disease. Future studies are warranted. Key words: SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; chloroquine; hydroxychloroquine; pandemic; coronavirus; adverse effects; side effects; cardiac arrhythmias; ocular toxicity, retinopathy; pharmacokinetic.

No abstract

BACKGROUND: Amitriptyline, duloxetine, and pregabalin are among the most pharmacotherapeutic, effective treatments for neuropathic pain control. However, the evaluation of synergism by combining these treatments is still poorly investigated. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the pharmacokinetics of the combination of pregabalin plus duloxetine and pregabalin plus amitriptyline, as well as the effect of these on neuropathic pain on rodent model. STUDY DESIGN: The experimental study. SETTING: The research took place in the research laboratories at the Federal University of Alfenas after ethics committee approval. METHODS: This study used male Wistar rats weighing between 220 and 250 g. The animals were randomly divided into the following groups: monotherapy (pregabalin, amitriptyline, duloxetine), combined therapy (pregabalin + amitriptyline, pregabalin + duloxetine), and vehicle (ultrapure water). Pharmacokinetic analysis of pregabalin or combination (pregabalin + amitriptyline or pregabalin + duloxetine) in the plasma were performed by ultraperformance liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry. Neuropathic pain was induced by sciatic nerve constriction (chronic constriction injury [CCI]) model, and nociceptive threshold was measured by von Frey filaments test. In addition, to evaluate the influence of the treatments on the motor coordination, the rotarod test was used. RESULTS: The pharmacokinetic disposition of pregabalin was changed in the association with amitriptyline, presenting a clearance reduction and consequently an increase in bioavailability. Furthermore, after the 14th day of CCI, pregabalin was administered orally and induced antiallodynic effect after 1, 2:15, 4, and 8 hours of its administration and showed the greatest antiallodynic effect after 4 hours of its administration. Moreover, this effect was prolonged (up to 8 hours) by combination with amitriptyline. Additionally, pregabalin and pregabalin + duloxetine showed a hypoalgesic effect in sham rats. In addition, the rotarod test results showed that drugs did not influence the motor coordination of the rats. LIMITATIONS: Potential competition mechanisms during the excretion of pregabalin, when pregabalin was combined with amitriptyline, were not investigated in this study. CONCLUSIONS: The data demonstrated that combined therapy of pregabalin plus amitriptyline improved the bioavailability of pregabalin and potentiated the efficacy of the antiallodynic effect of pregabalin alone, proving to be advantageous for the treatment of sciatic neuropathic pain. KEY WORDS: Neuropathic pain, pregabalin, duloxetine, amitriptyline, pharmacokinetic, antiallodynic effect, combined therapy, rats

Postoperative pain is one of the main negative symptoms resulting from surgery and the use of new methods to control this symptom is of ever-increasing relevance. Opioid-sparing strategies, such as multimodal analgesia, are trends in this scenario. Pregabalin is a well-established treatment for neuropathic pain; however, it is still controversial in the surgical context for postoperative analgesia.This study investigated the effect of pregabalin on postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing abdominal hysterectomy. It is a prospective, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Female patients undergoing abdominal hysterectomy were randomised to use pregabalin (group P1), 300 mg orally 2 h before surgery, or identical placebo pills (group P0). The main outcome includes the postoperative pain index by visual analogue scale (VAS) and McGill's pain questionnaire. Secondary outcomes include opioid consumption and the presence of adverse effects. A value of p < 0.05 was used to reject type I error.Fifty-five patients were randomised amongst the groups. Patients in group P1 had lower pain rates by VAS scale, both at rest and in active motion, than group P0. In McGill's questionnaire, patients from group P1 also had lower pain rates (12 Â 28.5). There was approximately twice as much opioid consumption amongst patients in group P0. Regarding side effects, there was a difference between the two groups only for dizziness, being more incident in group P1. This study suggests that pregabalin is an important adjuvant drug in treating postoperative pain in patients with abdominal hysterectomy.

No abstract