Suppr超能文献

用于神经性疼痛的阿片类药物。

Opioids for neuropathic pain.

作者信息

McNicol Ewan D, Midbari Ayelet, Eisenberg Elon

机构信息

Departments of Anesthesiology and Pharmacy, Tufts Medical Center, Box #420, 800 Washington Street, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, 02111.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Aug 29;2013(8):CD006146. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006146.pub2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 3, 2006, which included 23 trials. The use of opioids for neuropathic pain remains controversial. Studies have been small, have yielded equivocal results, and have not established the long-term profile of benefits and risks for people with neuropathic pain.

OBJECTIVES

To reassess the efficacy and safety of opioid agonists for the treatment of neuropathic pain.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (to 24th October 2012), MEDLINE (1966 to 24th October 2012 ), and EMBASE (1980 to 24th October 2012) for articles in any language, and reference lists of reviews and retrieved articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which opioid agonists were given to treat central or peripheral neuropathic pain of any etiology. Pain was assessed using validated instruments, and adverse events were reported. We excluded studies in which drugs other than opioid agonists were combined with opioids or opioids were administered epidurally or intrathecally.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and included demographic variables, diagnoses, interventions, efficacy, and adverse effects.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-one trials met our inclusion criteria, studying 10 different opioids: 23 studies from the original 2006 review and eight additional studies from this updated review.Seventeen studies (392 participants with neuropathic pain, average 22 participants per study) provided efficacy data for acute exposure to opioids over less than 24 hours. Sixteen reported pain outcomes, with contradictory results; 8/16 reported less pain with opioids than placebo, 2/16 reported that some but not all participants benefited, 5/16 reported no difference, and 1/16 reported equivocal results. Six studies with about 170 participants indicated that mean pain scores with opioid were about 15/100 points less than placebo.Fourteen studies (845 participants, average 60 participants per study) were of intermediate duration lasting 12 weeks or less; most studies lasted less than six weeks. Most studies used imputation methods for participant withdrawal known to be associated with considerable bias; none used a method known not to be associated with bias. The evidence, therefore, derives from studies predominantly with features likely to overestimate treatment effects, i.e. small size, short duration, and potentially inadequate handling of dropouts. All demonstrated opioid efficacy for spontaneous neuropathic pain. Meta-analysis demonstrated at least 33% pain relief in 57% of participants receiving an opioid versus 34% of those receiving placebo. The overall point estimate of risk difference was 0.25 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.13 to 0.37, P < 0.0001), translating to a number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) of 4.0 (95% CI 2.7 to 7.7). When the number of participants achieving at least 50% pain relief was analyzed, the overall point estimate of risk difference between opioids (47%) and placebo (30%) was 0.17 (95% CI 0.02 to 0.33, P = 0.03), translating to an NNTB of 5.9 (3.0 to 50.0). In the updated review, opioids did not demonstrate improvement in many aspects of emotional or physical functioning, as measured by various validated questionnaires. Constipation was the most common adverse event (34% opioid versus 9% placebo: number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 4.0; 95% CI 3.0 to 5.6), followed by drowsiness (29% opioid versus 14% placebo: NNTH 7.1; 95% CI 4.0 to 33.3), nausea (27% opioid versus 9% placebo: NNTH 6.3; 95% CI 4.0 to 12.5), dizziness (22% opioid versus 8% placebo: NNTH 7.1; 95% CI 5.6 to 10.0), and vomiting (12% opioid versus 4% placebo: NNTH 12.5; 95% CI 6.7 to 100.0). More participants withdrew from opioid treatment due to adverse events (13%) than from placebo (4%) (NNTH 12.5; 95% CI 8.3 to 25.0). Conversely, more participants receiving placebo withdrew due to lack of efficacy (12%) versus (2%) receiving opioids (NNTH -11.1; 95% CI -20.0 to -8.3).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Since the last version of this review, new studies were found providing additional information. Data were reanalyzed but the results did not alter any of our previously published conclusions. Short-term studies provide only equivocal evidence regarding the efficacy of opioids in reducing the intensity of neuropathic pain. Intermediate-term studies demonstrated significant efficacy of opioids over placebo, but these results are likely to be subject to significant bias because of small size, short duration, and potentially inadequate handling of dropouts. Analgesic efficacy of opioids in chronic neuropathic pain is subject to considerable uncertainty.  Reported adverse events of opioids were common but not life-threatening. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to establish unbiased estimates of long-term efficacy, safety (including addiction potential), and effects on quality of life.

摘要

背景

这是2006年第3期发表的原始Cochrane综述的更新版本,其中纳入了23项试验。使用阿片类药物治疗神经性疼痛仍存在争议。研究规模较小,结果不明确,且尚未确定神经性疼痛患者的长期获益和风险情况。

目的

重新评估阿片类激动剂治疗神经性疼痛的疗效和安全性。

检索方法

我们检索了Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)(截至2012年10月24日)、MEDLINE(1966年至2012年10月24日)和EMBASE(1980年至2012年10月24日),以获取任何语言的文章,以及综述和检索到的文章的参考文献列表。

入选标准

我们纳入了随机对照试验(RCT),其中给予阿片类激动剂治疗任何病因的中枢性或外周性神经性疼痛。使用经过验证的工具评估疼痛,并报告不良事件。我们排除了阿片类激动剂与其他药物联合使用或硬膜外或鞘内给予阿片类药物的研究。

数据收集与分析

两位综述作者独立提取数据,包括人口统计学变量、诊断、干预措施、疗效和不良反应。

主要结果

31项试验符合我们的纳入标准,研究了10种不同的阿片类药物:2006年原始综述中的23项研究以及本次更新综述中的8项额外研究。17项研究(392例神经性疼痛患者,每项研究平均22例患者)提供了阿片类药物急性暴露不足24小时的疗效数据。16项报告了疼痛结局,结果相互矛盾;16项中有8项报告阿片类药物组疼痛低于安慰剂组,16项中有2项报告部分但并非所有参与者获益,16项中有5项报告无差异,16项中有1项报告结果不明确。6项约170名参与者的研究表明,阿片类药物组的平均疼痛评分比安慰剂组低约15/100分。14项研究(845名参与者,每项研究平均60名参与者)为持续12周或更短时间的中期研究;大多数研究持续时间不到6周。大多数研究使用了已知与相当大偏差相关的参与者退出的插补方法;没有一项使用已知与偏差无关的方法。因此,证据主要来自可能高估治疗效果的研究,即规模小、持续时间短以及对退出者的处理可能不足。所有研究均证明阿片类药物对自发性神经性疼痛有效。荟萃分析表明,接受阿片类药物治疗的参与者中有57%疼痛缓解至少33%,而接受安慰剂治疗的参与者中这一比例为34%。风险差异的总体点估计值为0.25(95%置信区间(CI)0.13至0.37,P<0.0001),相当于为获得额外有益结局所需治疗的人数(NNTB)为4.0(95%CI 2.7至7.7)。当分析疼痛缓解至少50%的参与者数量时,阿片类药物组(47%)和安慰剂组(30%)之间风险差异的总体点估计值为0.17(95%CI 0.02至0.33,P = 0.03),相当于NNTB为5.9(3.0至50.0)。在本次更新综述中,通过各种经过验证的问卷测量,阿片类药物在情绪或身体功能的许多方面并未显示出改善。便秘是最常见的不良事件(阿片类药物组为34%,安慰剂组为9%:获得额外有害结局所需治疗的人数(NNTH)为4.0;95%CI 3.0至5.6),其次是嗜睡(阿片类药物组为29%,安慰剂组为14%:NNTH为7.1;95%CI 4.0至33.3)、恶心(阿片类药物组为27%,安慰剂组为9%:NNTH为6.3;95%CI 4.0至12.5)、头晕(阿片类药物组为22%,安慰剂组为8%:NNTH为7.1;95%CI 5.6至10.0)和呕吐(阿片类药物组为12%,安慰剂组为4%:NNTH为12.5;95%CI 6.7至100.0)。因不良事件退出阿片类药物治疗的参与者(13%)多于退出安慰剂治疗的参与者(4%)(NNTH为12.5;95%CI 8.3至25.0)。相反,因缺乏疗效而退出安慰剂治疗的参与者(12%)多于接受阿片类药物治疗的参与者(2%)(NNTH为 -11.1;95%CI -20.0至 -8.3)。

作者结论

自本综述的上一版本以来,发现了新的研究并提供了更多信息。对数据进行了重新分析,但结果并未改变我们之前发表的任何结论。短期研究关于阿片类药物减轻神经性疼痛强度的疗效仅提供了不明确的证据。中期研究表明阿片类药物比安慰剂具有显著疗效,但由于规模小、持续时间短以及对退出者的处理可能不足,这些结果可能存在显著偏差。阿片类药物在慢性神经性疼痛中的镇痛疗效存在很大不确定性。报告的阿片类药物不良事件很常见,但不危及生命。需要进一步的随机对照试验来建立关于长期疗效、安全性(包括成瘾可能性)以及对生活质量影响的无偏估计。

相似文献

1
Opioids for neuropathic pain.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Aug 29;2013(8):CD006146. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006146.pub2.
2
Opioids for neuropathic pain.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Jul 19(3):CD006146. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006146.
3
Cannabis-based medicines for chronic neuropathic pain in adults.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Mar 7;3(3):CD012182. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012182.pub2.
4
Methadone for neuropathic pain in adults.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 May 17;5(5):CD012499. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012499.pub2.
5
Oxcarbazepine for neuropathic pain.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Dec 2;12(12):CD007963. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007963.pub3.
6
Drugs for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults after general anaesthesia: a network meta-analysis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Oct 19;10(10):CD012859. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012859.pub2.
7
Hydromorphone for neuropathic pain in adults.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 May 24;2016(5):CD011604. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011604.pub2.
9
Oxycodone for neuropathic pain in adults.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Jul 28;7(7):CD010692. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010692.pub3.
10
Topical capsaicin (high concentration) for chronic neuropathic pain in adults.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jan 13;1(1):CD007393. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007393.pub4.

引用本文的文献

1
Methadone to treat chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (METACIN): study protocol.
Pain Manag. 2025 May;15(5):235-243. doi: 10.1080/17581869.2025.2494495. Epub 2025 Apr 28.
3
Pharmaceutical considerations in treating neuropathic pain in athletes.
Int Orthop. 2025 Apr;49(4):951-958. doi: 10.1007/s00264-025-06440-4. Epub 2025 Feb 12.
4
Optimal Delivery of Pain Management in Schwannomatosis: A Literature Review.
Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2025 Jan 17;21:61-68. doi: 10.2147/TCRM.S362794. eCollection 2025.
5
Targeting the kappa opioid receptor for analgesia and antitumour effects.
Br J Anaesth. 2025 Mar;134(3):646-648. doi: 10.1016/j.bja.2024.10.014. Epub 2025 Jan 3.
6
The Role of Phytochemicals in Managing Neuropathic Pain: How Much Progress Have We Made?
Nutrients. 2024 Dec 16;16(24):4342. doi: 10.3390/nu16244342.
8
Non-oral pharmacological interventions in the management of herpes zoster-related pain: a review of current research.
Front Pain Res (Lausanne). 2024 Nov 27;5:1485113. doi: 10.3389/fpain.2024.1485113. eCollection 2024.
10
The μ-opioid receptor differentiates two distinct human nociceptive populations relevant to clinical pain.
Cell Rep Med. 2024 Oct 15;5(10):101788. doi: 10.1016/j.xcrm.2024.101788.

本文引用的文献

5
Offset analgesia in neuropathic pain patients and effect of treatment with morphine and ketamine.
Anesthesiology. 2011 Nov;115(5):1063-71. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e31822fd03a.
6
Opioid dose and drug-related mortality in patients with nonmalignant pain.
Arch Intern Med. 2011 Apr 11;171(7):686-91. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2011.117.
7
Gabapentin for chronic neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia in adults.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Mar 16(3):CD007938. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007938.pub2.
9
Opioid-induced hyperalgesia: clinically relevant or extraneous research phenomenon?
Curr Pain Headache Rep. 2011 Apr;15(2):129-36. doi: 10.1007/s11916-010-0171-1.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验