Suppr超能文献

[阿片类药物用于慢性神经性疼痛。对至少持续4周的随机安慰剂对照研究中的疗效、耐受性和安全性进行系统评价和荟萃分析]

[Opioids in chronic neuropathic pain. A systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy, tolerability and safety in randomized placebo-controlled studies of at least 4 weeks duration].

作者信息

Sommer C, Welsch P, Klose P, Schaefert R, Petzke F, Häuser W

机构信息

Neurologische Klinik, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg, Deutschland.

出版信息

Schmerz. 2015 Feb;29(1):35-46. doi: 10.1007/s00482-014-1455-x.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of opioid therapy in chronic neuropathic pain (CNP) is under debate. We updated a recent Cochrane systematic review on the efficacy, tolerability and safety of opioids in CNP.

METHODS

We screened MEDLINE, Scopus and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) up until October 2013, as well as the reference sections of original studies and systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of opioids in CNP. We included double-blind randomized placebo-controlled studies of at least 4 weeks duration. Using a random effects model, absolute risk differences (RD) were calculated for categorical data and standardized mean differences (SMD) for continuous variables.

RESULTS

We included 12 RCTs with 1192 participants. The included diagnostic entities were painful diabetic neuropathy (four studies), postherpetic neuralgia (three studies), mixed polyneuropathic pain (two studies), and lumbar root, spinal cord injury and postamputation pain (one study each). Mean study duration was 6 (4-12) weeks. Four studies tested morphine, three studies tramadol, two studies oxycodone and one study tapentadol. These are the pooled results of studies with a parallel or cross-over design: opioids were superior to placebo in reducing pain intensity (SMD - 0.64 [95 % confidence interval, CI - 0.81, - 0.46], p < 0.0001; 11 studies with 1040 participants). Opioids were not superior to placebo in 50 % pain reduction (RD 0.16 [95 % CI - 0.04, 0.35], p = 0.11; one study with 93 participants). Opioids were not superior to placebo in reports of much or very much improved pain (RD 0.17 [95 % CI - 0.01, 0.36], p = 0.07; one study with 53 participants). Opioids were superior to placebo in improving physical functioning (SMD - 0.28 [95 % CI - 0.43, - 0.13], p < 0.0001; seven studies with 680 participants). Patients dropped out less frequently due to lack of efficacy with opioids than with placebo (RD - 0.07 [95 % CI - 0.13, - 0.02], p = 0.008; six studies with 656 participants). Patients dropped out due to adverse events more frequently with opioids than with placebo (RD 0.08 [95 % CI 0.05, 0.12], p < 0.0001; ten studies with 1018 participants; number needed to harm 11 [95 % CI 8-17]). There was no significant difference between opioids and placebo in terms of the frequency of serious adverse events (SAE) or deaths.

CONCLUSION

In short-term studies (4-12 weeks) in CNP, opioids were superior to placebo in terms of efficacy and inferior in terms of tolerability. Opioids and placebo did not differ in terms of safety. The conclusion relating to the safety of opioids compared to placebo in CNP is limited by the low number of SAE and deaths. Short-term opioid therapy may be considered in selected CNP patients. The English full-text version of this article is freely available at SpringerLink (under "Supplementary Material").

摘要

背景

阿片类药物疗法治疗慢性神经性疼痛(CNP)的疗效和安全性存在争议。我们更新了最近一项关于阿片类药物治疗CNP的疗效、耐受性和安全性的Cochrane系统评价。

方法

我们检索了截至2013年10月的MEDLINE、Scopus以及Cochrane对照试验中央注册库(CENTRAL),并检索了关于CNP中阿片类药物的原始研究和随机对照试验(RCT)系统评价的参考文献部分。我们纳入了至少为期4周的双盲随机安慰剂对照研究。使用随机效应模型,对分类数据计算绝对风险差异(RD),对连续变量计算标准化均数差异(SMD)。

结果

我们纳入了12项RCT,共1192名参与者。纳入的诊断病种包括疼痛性糖尿病神经病变(4项研究)、带状疱疹后神经痛(3项研究)、混合性多发性神经病变疼痛(2项研究)以及腰神经根、脊髓损伤和截肢后疼痛(各1项研究)。平均研究持续时间为6(4 - 12)周。4项研究测试了吗啡,3项研究测试了曲马多,2项研究测试了羟考酮,1项研究测试了他喷他多。这些是平行或交叉设计研究的汇总结果:阿片类药物在减轻疼痛强度方面优于安慰剂(SMD -0.64 [95%置信区间,CI -0.81,-0.46],p <0.0001;11项研究,1040名参与者)。在疼痛减轻50%方面,阿片类药物并不优于安慰剂(RD 0.16 [95% CI -0.04,0.35],p =0.11;1项研究,93名参与者)。在报告疼痛有很大或非常大改善方面,阿片类药物并不优于安慰剂(RD 0.17 [95% CI -0.01,0.36],p =0.07;1项研究,53名参与者)。阿片类药物在改善身体功能方面优于安慰剂(SMD -0.28 [95% CI -0.43,-0.13],p <0.0001;7项研究,680名参与者)。与安慰剂相比,因疗效不佳而退出的患者中,使用阿片类药物的频率更低(RD -0.07 [95% CI -0.13,-0.02],p =0.008;6项研究,656名参与者)。与安慰剂相比,因不良事件而退出的患者中,使用阿片类药物的频率更高(RD 0.08 [95% CI 0.05,0.12],p <0.0001;10项研究,1018名参与者;伤害所需人数为11 [95% CI 8 - 17])。在严重不良事件(SAE)或死亡频率方面,阿片类药物与安慰剂之间无显著差异。

结论

在CNP的短期研究(4 - 12周)中,阿片类药物在疗效方面优于安慰剂,而在耐受性方面较差。阿片类药物和安慰剂在安全性方面无差异。与安慰剂相比,关于CNP中阿片类药物安全性的结论因SAE和死亡数量较少而受到限制。对于部分CNP患者,可考虑短期阿片类药物治疗。本文的英文全文版本可在SpringerLink上免费获取(在“补充材料”下)。

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