Ketorolac is a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) with strong analgesic activity. The analgesic efficacy of ketorolac has been extensively evaluated in the postoperative setting, in both hospital inpatients and outpatients, and in patients with various other acute pain states. After major abdominal, orthopaedic or gynaecological surgery or ambulatory laparoscopic or gynaecological procedures, ketorolac provides relief from mild to severe pain in the majority of patients and has similar analgesic efficacy to that of standard dosages of morphine and pethidine (meperidine) as well as less frequently used opioids and other NSAIDs. The analgesic effect of ketorolac may be slightly delayed but often persists for longer than that of opioids. Combined therapy with ketorolac and an opioid results in a 25 to 50% reduction in opioid requirements, and in some patients this is accompanied by a concomitant decrease in opioid-induced adverse events, more rapid return to normal gastrointestinal function and shorter stay in hospital. In children undergoing myringotomy, hernia repair, tonsillectomy, or other surgery associated with mild to moderate pain, ketorolac provides comparable analgesia to morphine, pethidine or paracetamol (acetaminophen). In the emergency department, ketorolac attenuates moderate to severe pain in patients with renal colic, migraine headache, musculoskeletal pain or sickle cell crisis and is usually as effective as frequently used opioids, such as morphine and pethidine, and other NSAIDs and analgesics. Subcutaneous administration of ketorolac reduces pain in patients with cancer and seems particularly beneficial in pain resulting from bone metastases. The acquisition cost of ketorolac is greater than that of morphine or pethidine; however, in a small number of studies, the higher cost of ketorolac was offset when treatment with ketorolac resulted in a reduced hospital stay compared with alternative opioid therapy. The tolerability profile of ketorolac parallels that of other NSAIDs; most clinically important adverse events affect the gastrointestinal tract and/or renal or haematological function. The incidence of serious or fatal adverse events reported with ketorolac has decreased since revision of dosage guidelines. Results from a large retrospective postmarketing surveillance study in more than 20,000 patients demonstrated that the overall risk of gastrointestinal or operative site bleeding related to parenteral ketorolac therapy was only slightly higher than with opioids. However, the risk increased markedly when high dosages were used for more than 5 days, especially in the elderly. Acute renal failure may occur after treatment with ketorolac but is usually reversible on drug discontinuation. In common with other NSAIDs, ketorolac has also been implicated in allergic or hypersensitivity reactions. In summary, ketorolac is a strong analgesic with a tolerability profile which resembles that of other NSAIDs. When used in accordance with current dosage guidelines, this drug provides a useful al...

Tacrolimus (FK 506) has been evaluated as immunosuppressive therapy in patients with a variety of solid organ and other transplants. Extensive data have now confirmed its efficacy as primary or rescue therapy in renal and hepatic transplantation. In prospective and historically controlled studies of primary therapy, tacrolimus generally demonstrated greater efficacy than the conventional formulation of cyclosporin for preventing episodes of acute rejection and allowed reduction of corticosteroid use. Chronic rejection rates were also significantly lower with tacrolimus in a large randomised liver transplantation trial. However, patient and graft survival rates were similar in both treatment groups (although numerically larger in adults with liver transplants). In children, rejection rates and corticosteroid requirements were usually lower with tacrolimus and patient and graft survival were generally similar with the 2 immunosuppressants. The finding of reduced corticosteroid requirements with tacrolimus may be of particular benefit in prepubertal children, who are still growing. A small amount of evidence has also accumulated regarding the use of tacrolimus as primary therapy in patients who have undergone bone marrow or heart and/or lung transplantation. Data are not conclusive, particularly in children, but tacrolimus appears to be useful for treating patients who have undergone these organ transplantations and may be associated with a lower incidence of obliterative bronchiolitis than cyclosporin in the latter group. Potential efficacy has also been shown in a limited number of patients with pancreas or pancreas-kidney, pancreatic islet and intestinal or multivisceral transplants, and in children who have undergone heart or heart-lung transplantation. Tacrolimus also has a use as rescue therapy in bone marrow, heart, lung and pancreatic transplantation, but data are currently insufficient for conclusions to be made. However, these results support the need for further study in these populations. Adverse effects occurring during tacrolimus therapy are generally of the type common to all immunosuppressive regimens. However, diabetes mellitus, neurotoxicity and nephrotoxicity are more common in tacrolimus than cyclosporin recipients. Hyperlipidaemia, hypertension, hirsutism and gingival hyperplasia are more common with cyclosporin. In 2 large multicentre clinical trials (US liver and European renal), tacrolimus was discontinued more frequently during the first year because of adverse events. However, the tolerability of tacrolimus appears related to dosage, improving as the dose is reduced. Tacrolimus should be considered an effective primary immunosuppressant in renal and hepatic transplantation. The drug is also a useful agent for rescue therapy in patients experiencing rejection or poor tolerability to cyclosporin. Thus, tacrolimus provides the clinician with an effective option for patients requiring immunosuppression and, with a different tolerability and efficacy profile to cyclosporin, it will better allow ...

Irbesartan inhibits the activity of angiotensin II (AII) via specific, selective noncompetitive antagonism of the AII receptor subtype 1 (AT1) which mediates most of the known physiological activities of AII. In patients with mild to moderate hypertension, once daily administration of irbesartan 150 or 300 mg, with or without adjunctive antihypertensive agents, provides effective 24-hour BP control. Irbesartan reduced BP to a similar extent to enalapril and atenolol and to a significantly greater extent than losartan. The combination of irbesartan and hydrochlorothiazide resulted in additive antihypertensive effects. The drug is effective in the elderly and dosage adjustment is not required in these patients or in those with renal or hepatic failure. Preliminary studies evaluating the efficacy of irbesartan in patients with heart failure have produced encouraging results. Irbesartan is very well tolerated and neither the frequency nor the pattern of adverse events differed from those seen in placebo recipients, although headache was significantly more frequent with the latter. Similarly, the incidence of adverse events did not differ significantly between irbesartan and enalapril in patients who received either drug as monotherapy. Headache, upper-respiratory tract infection and musculoskeletal pain were the most common complaints. Thus, irbesartan is an effective therapy for patients with mild to moderate hypertension and had an adverse event profile similar to that of placebo in clinical trials. On this basis it would appear to be an effective therapeutic option in this indication.

Topiramate is a sulphamate-substituted monosaccharide derived from D-fructose and is structurally unrelated to other antiepileptic drugs. It acts by multiple mechanisms that suggest it may be effective in several types of epilepsy. In double-blind placebo-controlled trials, add-on therapy with topiramate 400 to 1000 mg/day reduces the seizure rate by > or = 50% in 35 to 52% of adult patients with resistant partial epilepsy (with or without secondarily generalised seizures) compared with 0 to 19% of placebo recipients; a 200 mg/day dosage was less effective. Topiramate has also been shown to be superior in efficacy to placebo in well controlled trials in patients with generalised tonic-clonic seizures, Lennox-Gastaut syndrome and in paediatric patients with partial epilepsy. Efficacy has been maintained for 7 years and some patients may also be satisfactorily treated with topiramate monotherapy. Further study is needed to follow up on the promising results of topiramate use in other paediatric epilepsies. Adverse CNS events are the most common untoward effects during topiramate therapy and are most likely to lead to withdrawal of the drug. However, most adverse events are mild to moderate in severity and lessen with continued drug therapy. In clinical trials, most adverse events which were dose limiting or led to discontinuation of treatment occurred during the titration phase. The overall incidence of adverse events may be reduced by slower upward dosage titration. In summary, topiramate appears to be a suitable agent for add-on therapy in adult patients with partial epilepsy. Preliminary reports support the use of add-on topiramate in adults with generalised epilepsy, in childhood epilepsies and in patients with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome, as well as the use of topiramate monotherapy in patients with partial epilepsy. Thus, topiramate can be considered an important new drug for the management of patients with refractory epilepsy.

Rifaximin is a derivative of rifamycin which acts by inhibiting bacterial ribonucleic acid (RNA) synthesis. It is virtually unabsorbed after oral administration; thus it is used primarily to treat local conditions within the gastrointestinal tract. In vitro data indicate rifaximin possesses good activity against species of Staphylococcus, Streptococcus and Enterococcus but lesser activity against species of Enterobacteriaceae. Bacterial resistance during exposure to rifaximin has been reported but its clinical importance remains to be fully defined. Results of comparative trials demonstrate that rifaximin is similar in efficacy to neomycin and lactulose in patients with hepatic encephalopathy and appears to be better tolerated. In 1 study, cyclical administration of rifaximin for 15 days per month was associated with progressive improvement over a 3-month period. In patients with infectious diarrhoea, rifaximin induces more rapid improvement in stool consistency and decreased frequency of faecal evacuations when compared with placebo, and is similar in efficacy to neomycin. Available data suggest rifaximin may be of some use in acute diverticulitis, but its use for the prevention of inflammatory complications or for control of common symptoms of diverticulosis requires further study. Preoperative treatment with rifaximin as antibacterial prophylaxis in colorectal surgery shows some potential but should be further investigated. Overall, rifaximin may be useful as an alternative therapy in hepatic encephalopathy but more data are needed to better define its clinical potential in infectious diarrhoea, diverticular disease and as antibacterial prophylaxis prior to colorectal surgery.