Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34882311›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2021

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for acute gout.

Caroline Mpg van Durme, Mihir D Wechalekar, Robert Bm Landewé, Jordi Pardo Pardo, Sheila Cyril, Désirée van der Heijde, Rachelle Buchbinder

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT06863701 phase3recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Efficacy and Safety Study for the Combination of Etoricoxib / Betamethasone Compared to Etoricoxib for the Treatment of Patients Diagnosed With Acute Gout Arthritis

TypeinterventionalSponsorLaboratorios Silanes S.A. de C.V.Ran2025 to 2027Enrolled72ConditionsGout Arthritis, Gout AttackArmsEtoricoxib + Betamethasone fixed dose, Etoricoxib fixed dose
NCT07061587 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Developing A Gout Action Plan in Primary Care Setting in Singapore

TypeinterventionalSponsorSingHealth PolyclinicsRan2025 to 2027Enrolled72ConditionsGout, Hyperuricemia, Gout Flare, Gout ChronicArmsGout action plan
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. [Comprehensive management of tophaceous wound].Zhejiang da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Zhejiang University. Medical sciences · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Integrated Network Pharmacology andCombinatorial chemistry & high throughput screening · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Gout therapy updated.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Assessment of oral toxicity ofVeterinary world · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Antigout effects and mechanisms of total flavonoids from prunus tomentosa.Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine · 2024
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.

Caroline Mpg van DurmeDepartment of Internal Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Mihir D WechalekarRheumatology Unit, Repatriation General Hospital, Daw Park, Australia.
Robert Bm LandewéDepartment of Clinical Immunology and Rheumatology, Amsterdam Medical Centre, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Jordi Pardo PardoOttawa Hospital Research Institute, The Ottawa Hospital - General Campus, Ottawa, Canada.
Sheila CyrilDepartment of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University; Monash-Cabrini Department of Musculoskeletal Health and Clinical Epidemiology, Cabrini Health, Melbourne, Australia.
Désirée van der HeijdeDepartment of Rheumatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands.
Rachelle BuchbinderDepartment of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University; Monash-Cabrini Department of Musculoskeletal Health and Clinical Epidemiology, Cabrini Health, Melbourne, Australia.
Cabrini Hospital · AULeiden University Medical Center · NLMaastricht University · NLOttawa Hospital · CARepatriation General Hospital · AUZuyderland Medisch Centrum · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGout is an inflammatory arthritis resulting from the deposition of monosodium urate crystals in and around joints. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly used to treat acute gout. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2014.

objectivesTo assess the benefits and harms of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (including cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors (COXIBs)) for acute gout. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase for studies to 28 August 2020. We applied no date or language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing NSAIDs with placebo or another therapy for acute gout. Major outcomes were pain, inflammation, function, participant-reported global assessment, quality of life, withdrawals due to adverse events, and total adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures as expected by Cochrane. MAIN

resultsWe included in this update 28 trials (3406 participants), including 5 new trials. One trial (30 participants) compared NSAIDs to placebo, 6 (1244 participants) compared non-selective NSAIDs to selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors (COXIBs), 5 (712 participants) compared NSAIDs to glucocorticoids, 13 compared one NSAID to another NSAID (633 participants), and single trials compared NSAIDs to rilonacept (225 participants), acupuncture (163 participants), and colchicine (399 participants). Most trials were at risk of selection, performance, and detection biases. We report numerical data for the primary comparison NSAIDs versus placebo and brief results for the two comparisons - NSAIDs versus COX-2 inhibitors and NSAIDs versus glucocorticoids. Low-certainty evidence (downgraded for bias and imprecision) from 1 trial (30 participants) shows NSAIDs compared to placebo. More participants (11/15) may have a 50% reduction in pain at 24 hours with NSAIDs than with placebo (4/15) (risk ratio (RR) 2.7, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1 to 6.7), with absolute improvement of 47% (3.5% more to 152.5% more). NSAIDs may have little to no effect on inflammation (swelling) after four days (13/15 participants taking NSAIDs versus 12/15 participants taking placebo; RR 1.1, 95% CI 0.8 to 1.5), with absolute improvement of 6.4% (16.8% fewer to 39.2% more). There may be little to no difference in function (4-point scale; 1 = complete resolution) at 24 hours (4/15 participants taking NSAIDs versus 1/15 participants taking placebo; RR 4.0, 95% CI 0.5 to 31.7), with absolute improvement of 20% (3.3% fewer to 204.9% more). NSAIDs may result in little to no difference in withdrawals due to adverse events (0 events in both groups) or in total adverse events; two adverse events (nausea and polyuria) were reported in the placebo group (RR 0.2, 95% CI 0.0, 3.8), with absolute difference of 10.7% more (13.2% fewer to 38% more). Treatment success and health-related quality of life were not measured. Moderate-certainty evidence (downgraded for bias) from 6 trials (1244 participants) shows non-selective NSAIDs compared to selective COX-2 inhibitors (COXIBs). Non-selective NSAIDs probably result in little to no difference in pain (mean difference (MD) 0.03, 95% CI 0.07 lower to 0.14 higher), swelling (MD 0.08, 95% CI 0.07 lower to 0.22 higher), treatment success (MD 0.08, 95% CI 0.04 lower to 0.2 higher), or quality of life (MD -0.2, 95% CI -6.7 to 6.3) compared to COXIBs. Low-certainty evidence (downgraded for bias and imprecision) suggests no difference in function (MD 0.04, 95% CI -0.17 to 0.25) between groups. Non-selective NSAIDs probably increase withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 2.3, 95% CI 1.3 to 4.1) and total adverse events (mainly gastrointestinal) (RR 1.9, 95% CI 1.4 to 2.8). Moderate-certainty evidence (downgraded for bias) based on 5 trials (712 participants) shows NSAIDs compared to glucocorticoids. NSAIDs probably result in little to no difference in pain (MD 0.1, 95% CI -2.7 to 3.0), inflammation (MD 0.3, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.6), function (MD -0.2, 95% CI -2.2 to 1.8), or treatment success (RR 0.9, 95% CI 0.7 to 1.2). There was no difference in withdrawals due to adverse events with NSAIDs compared to glucocorticoids (RR 2.8, 95% CI 0.5 to 14.2). There was a decrease in total adverse events with glucocorticoids compared to NSAIDs (RR 1.6, 95% CI 1.0 to 2.5). AUTHORS'

conclusionsLow-certainty evidence from 1 placebo-controlled trial suggests that NSAIDs may improve pain at 24 hours and may have little to no effect on function, inflammation, or adverse events for treatment of acute gout. Moderate-certainty evidence shows that COXIBs and non-selective NSAIDs are probably equally beneficial with regards to improvement in pain, function, inflammation, and treatment success, although non-selective NSAIDs probably increase withdrawals due to adverse events and total adverse events. Moderate-certainty evidence shows that systemic glucocorticoids and NSAIDs probably are equally beneficial in terms of pain relief, improvement in function, and treatment success. Withdrawals due to adverse events were also similar between groups, but NSAIDs probably result in more total adverse events. Low-certainty evidence suggests no difference in inflammation between groups. Only low-certainty evidence was available for the comparisons NSAID versus rilonacept and NSAID versus acupuncture from single trials, or one NSAID versus another NSAID, which also included many NSAIDs that are no longer in clinical use. Although these data were insufficient to support firm conclusions, they do not conflict with clinical guideline recommendations based upon evidence from observational studies, findings for other inflammatory arthritis, and expert consensus, all of which support the use of NSAIDs for acute gout.

Indexed as

GoutPharmaceutical PreparationsAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalColchicineCyclooxygenase 2 InhibitorsHumansAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalColchicineCyclooxygenase 2 InhibitorsPharmaceutical Preparations

Identifiers

PMID34882311
PMCPMC8656463
OpenAlexW4200213505

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.