Rupatadine is a better choice for seasonal allergic rhinitis compared with levocetirizine because of its better efficacy and safety profile.

Objective:To compare the efficacy and safety of olopatadine and rupatadine in seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR).Materials and Methods:A 2-week, single-centered, randomized, open, parallel group comparative clinical study was conducted on patients with SAR. Following inclusion and exclusion criteria, 70 patients were recruited and were randomized to two treatment groups and received the respective drugs for 2 weeks. At follow-up, clinical improvement was assessed in terms of change in total and differential count of leucocytes, serum Immunoglobulin E (IgE) level, Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS) and Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) scoring.Results:Both the drugs significantly reduced the differential count (P<0.001) and absolute eosinophil count (P<0.001), but olopatadine was found to be superior. In olopatadine group, there was significantly higher reduction in serum IgE (P=0.01), TNSS (P<0.001) and RQLQ score (P=0.015) than that of rupatadine. Incidence of adverse effects was found to be less in olopatadine group when compared with rupatadine group.Conclusions:Olopatadine is a better choice in SAR in comparison to rupatadine due to its better efficacy and safety profile.

is one of the most common form of joint disease in humans and is a leading cause of musculoskeletal d isability in elderly patients. 1 The World Health Organization (WHO) figures of world wide estimates are that 9.6% of men and 18% o f wo men aged more than 60 years have symptomatic OA. 2

Background:Treatment of chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU) is challenging because of its unpredictable course and negative influence on the quality of life. New treatments are being developed, but antihistaminics remain the cornerstone of the therapeutic approach. Newer generation antihistaminics such as loratadine and levocetirizine have already proved to be safe and efficacious for CIU.Objective:To choose the better drug between loratadine and levocetirizine for CIU, by comparing their efficacy and safety.Methods:A randomized, open, outdoor-based clinical study was conducted on 60 patients of CIU, to compare the two drugs. After initial clinical assessment and baseline investigations, loratadine was prescribed to 30 patients and levocetirizine to another 30 patients for four weeks. At follow-up, the patients were re-evaluated and then compared using different statistical tools.Result:The comparative study showed that the changes in differential eosinophil count (P = 0.006) and absolute eosinophil count (P = 0.003) in the levocetirizine group was statistically significant. The results of the Total Symptom Score showed better symptomatic improvement of CIU with levocetirizine as compared to loratadine. The overall incidence of adverse drug reactions was also found to be less in the levocetirizine group.Conclusion:An analysis of the results of all the parameters of safety and efficacy proves the superiority of levocetirizine over loratadine for CIU.

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a leading cause of musculoskeletal disability in elderly patients. It is a slow evolving disorder causing degeneration of articular cartilage associated with symptoms of joint tenderness, stiffness and limitation of movement. These symptoms get more worsened with weight bearing and movement. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory (NSAIDS) drugs and often Opioid analgesics offers a symptomatic relief in the management of osteoarthritis. So, the present study is conducted to compare the efficacy and tolerability of Tramadol and Aceclofenac in patients of osteoarthritis. MATERIALS AND METHODS The present study is a randomized, single centered, prospective clinical study and was conducted on 140 patients. INCLUSION CRITERIA Patients of sex, aged 40-60 years, suffering with symptoms of OA of knee who are radiologically diagnosed. EXCLUSION CRITERIA  Patients <40 and >60 years of age.  Patients with a history of peptic ulcers and hypersensitivity to NSAIDs/Opioids.  Patients with history of bleeding tendencies, cirrhosis and oesophageal varices.  Patients who have previously received Tramadol or Aceclofenac for treatment of osteoarthritis. After initial clinical assessment and baseline investigations, Aceclofenac tablet was given to 70 patients and Tramadol tablet was given orally to another 70 patients for 8 weeks. At the follow up, the results were analysed and compared statistically by paired t-test, unpaired t-test, Fischer's exact test. RESULTS Aceclofenac has shown significant change than Tramadol in efficacy parameters like Western Ontario Mac Master (WOMAC) scores (p<0.0001), joint tenderness (p<0.0001), investigator assessment for disease status (p=0.01) and response to therapy (p=0.038). Incidence of adverse effects is significant with Tramadol (p=0.02). DISCUSSION Aceclofenac was found superior than Tramadol in improving the patient's clinical condition. Aceclofenac was found to be well tolerated than Tramadol in terms of nausea, dyspepsia, epigastric distress, drowsiness. CONCLUSION Aceclofenac is efficacious and safer drug than Tramadol in treatment of osteoarthritis of knee.