Derry Sheena, Stannard Cathy, Cole Peter, Wiffen Philip J, Knaggs Roger, Aldington Dominic, Moore R Andrew
Pain Research and Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences (Nuffield Division of Anaesthetics), University of Oxford, Pain Research Unit, Churchill Hospital, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK, OX3 7LE.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Oct 11;10(10):CD011605. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011605.pub2.
Opioid drugs, including fentanyl, are commonly used to treat neuropathic pain, and are considered effective by some professionals. Most reviews have examined all opioids together. This review sought evidence specifically for fentanyl, at any dose, and by any route of administration. Other opioids are considered in separate reviews.
To assess the analgesic efficacy of fentanyl for chronic neuropathic pain in adults, and the adverse events associated with its use in clinical trials.
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase from inception to June 2016, together with the reference lists of retrieved articles, and two online study registries.
We included randomised, double-blind studies of two weeks' duration or longer, comparing fentanyl (in any dose, administered by any route, and in any formulation) with placebo or another active treatment in chronic neuropathic pain.
Two review authors independently searched for studies, extracted efficacy and adverse event data, and examined issues of study quality and potential bias. We did not carry out any pooled analyses. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE.
Only one study met our inclusion criteria. Participants were men and women (mean age 67 years), with postherpetic neuralgia, complex regional pain syndrome, or chronic postoperative pain. They were experiencing inadequate relief from non-opioid analgesics, and had not previously taken opioids for their neuropathic pain. The study used an enriched enrolment randomised withdrawal design. It was adequately blinded, but we judged it at unclear risk of bias for other criteria.Transdermal fentanyl (one-day fentanyl patch) was titrated over 10 to 29 days to establish the maximum tolerated and effective dose (12.5 to 50 µg/h). Participants who achieved a prespecified good level of pain relief with a stable dose of fentanyl, without excessive use of rescue medication or intolerable adverse events ('responders'), were randomised to continue with fentanyl or switch to placebo for 12 weeks, under double-blind conditions. Our prespecified primary outcomes were not appropriate for this study design, but the measures reported do give an indication of the efficacy of fentanyl in this condition.In the titration phase, 1 in 3 participants withdrew because of adverse events or inadequate pain relief, and almost 90% experienced adverse events. Of 258 participants who underwent open-label titration, 163 were 'responders' and entered the randomised withdrawal phase. The number of participants completing the study (and therefore continuing on treatment) without an increase of pain by more than 15/100 was 47/84 (56%) with fentanyl and 28/79 (35%) with placebo. Because only 63% responded sufficiently to enter the randomised withdrawal phase, this implies that only a maximum of 35% of participants entering the study would have had useful pain relief and tolerability with transdermal fentanyl, compared with 22% with placebo. Almost 60% of participants taking fentanyl were 'satisfied' and 'very satisfied' with their treatment at the end of the study, compared with about 40% with placebo. This outcome approximates to our primary outcome of moderate benefit using the Patient Global Impression of Change scale, but the group was enriched for responders and the method of analysis was not clear. The most common adverse events were constipation, nausea, somnolence, and dizziness.There was no information about other types of neuropathic pain, other routes of administration, or comparisons with other treatments.We downgraded the quality of the evidence to very low because there was only one study, with few participants and events, and there was no information about how data from people who withdrew were analysed.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to support or refute the suggestion that fentanyl works in any neuropathic pain condition.
包括芬太尼在内的阿片类药物常用于治疗神经性疼痛,一些专业人士认为其有效。大多数综述将所有阿片类药物放在一起研究。本综述专门寻找关于任何剂量、任何给药途径的芬太尼的证据。其他阿片类药物在单独的综述中讨论。
评估芬太尼对成人慢性神经性疼痛的镇痛效果以及在临床试验中使用芬太尼相关的不良事件。
我们检索了Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)、MEDLINE和Embase,检索时间从建库至2016年6月,同时检索了检索文章的参考文献列表以及两个在线研究注册库。
我们纳入了为期两周或更长时间的随机双盲研究,比较芬太尼(任何剂量、任何给药途径、任何剂型)与安慰剂或其他活性治疗用于慢性神经性疼痛的疗效。
两位综述作者独立检索研究、提取疗效和不良事件数据,并检查研究质量和潜在偏倚问题。我们未进行任何汇总分析。我们使用GRADE评估证据质量。
仅一项研究符合我们的纳入标准。参与者包括男性和女性(平均年龄67岁),患有带状疱疹后神经痛、复杂性区域疼痛综合征或慢性术后疼痛。他们使用非阿片类镇痛药缓解疼痛效果不佳,且之前未使用过阿片类药物治疗神经性疼痛。该研究采用了富集入组随机撤药设计。研究设盲充分,但我们判断其在其他标准方面存在偏倚风险不明的情况。透皮芬太尼(一日量芬太尼贴剂)在10至29天内进行滴定以确定最大耐受有效剂量(12.5至50μg/小时)。在稳定剂量的芬太尼治疗下达到预先设定的良好疼痛缓解水平、未过度使用解救药物或出现不可耐受不良事件的参与者(“反应者”),在双盲条件下被随机分为继续使用芬太尼或改用安慰剂,为期12周。我们预先设定的主要结局不适用于该研究设计,但所报告的测量指标确实能表明芬太尼在这种情况下的疗效。
在滴定阶段,三分之一的参与者因不良事件或疼痛缓解不足而退出,近90%的参与者经历了不良事件。在258名接受开放标签滴定的参与者中,163名是“反应者”并进入随机撤药阶段。在未使疼痛增加超过15/100的情况下完成研究(即继续接受治疗)的参与者数量,使用芬太尼的为47/84(56%),使用安慰剂的为28/79(35%)。由于只有63%的参与者反应充分而进入随机撤药阶段,则这意味着进入研究的参与者中,使用透皮芬太尼时最多只有35%的人能获得有效的疼痛缓解和耐受性,而使用安慰剂的为22%。在研究结束时,近六成服用芬太尼的参与者对治疗“满意”或 “非常满意”,而服用安慰剂的约为四成。该结果接近我们使用患者总体印象变化量表得出的中度获益的主要结局,但该组富集了反应者且分析方法不明。最常见的不良事件是便秘、恶心、嗜睡和头晕。
没有关于其他类型神经性疼痛、其他给药途径或与其他治疗比较的信息。
我们将证据质量降至极低,因为仅有一项研究,参与者和事件数量较少,且没有关于如何分析退出者数据的信息。
没有足够证据支持或反驳芬太尼对任何神经性疼痛有效这一观点。