Majdinasab Nastaran, Kaveyani Hossein, Azizi Mojgan
Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation Research Center, Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran.
Department of Neurology, Golestan Hospital, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran.
Drug Des Devel Ther. 2019 Jun 17;13:1985-1992. doi: 10.2147/DDDT.S185995. eCollection 2019.
The most common cause of polyneuropathy is diabetes mellitus. Neuropathic pain is seen in 26% of diabetic population. Therapeutic techniques for this disease can become challenging. This study was a prospective comparative double-blind randomized study which was conducted during an eight-week period. Totally, 104 painful diabetic peripheral polyneuropathy (PDPP) patients who had a minimum Visual Analog Scale (VAS) of 40 millimeters, received no pain-controlling medication, and had no other severe disease at its final stage were randomly assigned to two groups (n=52) through the four block method. One group received Duloxetine and the other received Gabapentin. The effectiveness was measured through primary effectiveness (VAS scale) and secondary effectiveness (Sleep Interference Score, and Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC)). Medication compliance was assessed by enumerating the number of patients who refused treatment because of side effects. The Fisher's exact T-test and ANOVA were used for data analysis. This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Jundishapur, University of Medical sciences Ahvaz, Iran, under reference number: IR.AJUMS.REC.1395.78. In addition, this study was registered and approved in the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT ID: IRCT20161023030455N2) (http://irct.ir/). VAS, Sleep Interference Score, and CGIC were significantly improved (P<0.05) through time in both groups, [For GBP: VAS=64±20.03, VAS=55.32±18.76, VAS=44.68±15.82, VAS=39.43±14.32; For DLX: VAS=62±21.18, VAS=58.76±20.37, VAS=45.84±16.21, VAS=36.78±15.62] while a significant difference between the two groups was not observed (P<0.05). However, such significant improvements were not observed in the Duloxetine group at the end of the first week (P=674). Improvement in Sleep Interference Score and CGIC were similar to the results for the VAS scale. Side effects in the Duloxetine group (n=2) compared to the Gabapentin group (n=9) were significantly less (P<0.001). As a result, medication acceptance in the Duloxetine group (n=47) was significantly better than the Gabapentin (n=41) group (P<0.001). Both Duloxetine and Gabapentin are effective for the treatment of PDPP. On the one hand, Gabapentin shows the effect earlier while has more side effects. Conversely, Duloxetine has better medication compliance. The method of this study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran, under reference number: IR.AJUMS.REC.1395.78. In addition, this study was registered and approved in the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT ID: IRCT20161023030455N2) (http://irct.ir/).
多发性神经病最常见的病因是糖尿病。26%的糖尿病患者会出现神经病理性疼痛。针对这种疾病的治疗技术可能具有挑战性。本研究是一项前瞻性比较双盲随机研究,为期八周。共有104例疼痛性糖尿病周围神经病(PDPP)患者,其视觉模拟评分(VAS)最低为40毫米,未服用止痛药物,且在研究末期无其他严重疾病,通过四区组法随机分为两组(n = 52)。一组接受度洛西汀治疗,另一组接受加巴喷丁治疗。通过主要疗效指标(VAS量表)和次要疗效指标(睡眠干扰评分及临床整体改善印象(CGIC))来衡量疗效。通过统计因副作用而拒绝治疗的患者数量来评估药物依从性。采用Fisher精确T检验和方差分析进行数据分析。本研究经伊朗阿瓦兹医科大学赞詹沙布尔伦理委员会批准,批准号为:IR.AJUMS.REC.1395.78。此外,本研究已在伊朗临床试验注册中心注册并获批(IRCT ID:IRCT20161023030455N2)(http://irct.ir/)。两组患者的VAS、睡眠干扰评分及CGIC均随时间显著改善(P < 0.05),[加巴喷丁组:VAS分别为64±20.03、55.32±18.76、44.68±15.82、39.43±14.32;度洛西汀组:VAS分别为62±21.18、58.76±20.37、45.84±16.21、36.78±15.62],但两组间未观察到显著差异(P < 0.05)。然而,度洛西汀组在第一周结束时未观察到如此显著的改善(P = 674)。睡眠干扰评分和CGIC的改善情况与VAS量表结果相似。度洛西汀组(n = 2)的副作用明显少于加巴喷丁组(n = 9)(P < 0.001)。因此,度洛西汀组(n = 47)的药物接受度明显优于加巴喷丁组(n = 41)(P < 0.001)。度洛西汀和加巴喷丁对PDPP均有效。一方面,加巴喷丁起效较早,但副作用较多。相反,度洛西汀的药物依从性更好。本研究方法经伊朗阿瓦兹医科大学赞詹沙布尔伦理委员会批准,批准号为:IR.AJUMS.REC.1395.78。此外,本研究已在伊朗临床试验注册中心注册并获批(IRCT ID:IRCT20161023030455N2)(http://irct.ir/)。