Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Oct 21;10(10):CD012157. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012157.pub2.
Although pain is common in osteoarthritis, most people fail to achieve adequate analgesia. Increasing acknowledgement of the contribution of pain sensitisation has resulted in the investigation of medications affecting pain processing with central effects. Antidepressants contribute to pain management in other conditions where pain sensitisation is present.
To assess the benefits and harms of antidepressants for the treatment of symptomatic knee and hip osteoarthritis in adults.
We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search was January 2021.
We included randomised controlled trials of adults with osteoarthritis that compared use of antidepressants to placebo or alternative comparator. We included trials that focused on efficacy (pain and function), treatment-related adverse effects and had documentation regarding discontinuation of participants. We excluded trials of less than six weeks of duration or had participants with concurrent mental health disorders.
We used standard Cochrane methods. Major outcomes were pain; responder rate; physical function; quality of life; and proportion of participants who withdrew due to adverse events, experienced any adverse events or had serious adverse events. Minor outcomes were proportion meeting the OARSI (Osteoarthritis Research Society International) Response Criteria, radiographic joint structure changes and proportion of participants who dropped out of the study for any reason. We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence.
Nine trials (2122 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Seven trials examined only knee osteoarthritis. Two also included participants with hip osteoarthritis. All trials compared antidepressants to placebo, with or without non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Trial sizes were 36 to 388 participants. Most participants were female, with mean ages of 54.5 to 65.9 years. Trial durations were 8 to 16 weeks. Six trials examined duloxetine. We combined data from nine trials in meta-analyses for knee and hip osteoarthritis. One trial was at low risk of bias in all domains. Five trials were at risk of attrition and reporting bias. High-certainty evidence found that antidepressants resulted in a clinically unimportant improvement in pain compared to placebo. Mean reduction in pain (0 to 10 scale, 0 = no pain) was 1.7 points with placebo and 2.3 points with antidepressants (mean difference (MD) -0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.88 to -0.31; 9 trials, 2122 participants). Clinical response was defined as achieving a 50% or greater reduction in 24-hour mean pain. High-certainty evidence demonstrated that 45% of participants receiving antidepressants had a clinical response compared to 28.6% receiving placebo (RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.32 to 1.82; 6 RCTs, 1904 participants). This corresponded to an absolute improvement in pain of 16% more responders with antidepressants (8.9% more to 26% more) and a number needed to treat for an additional beneficial effect (NNTB) of 6 (95% CI 4 to 11). High-certainty evidence showed that the mean improvement in function (on 0 to 100 Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index, 0 = best function) was 10.51 points with placebo and 16.16 points with antidepressants (MD -5.65 points, 95% CI -7.08 to -4.23; 6 RCTs, 1909 participants). This demonstrates a small, clinically unimportant response. Moderate-certainty evidence (downgraded for imprecision) showed that quality of life measured using the EuroQol 5-Dimension scale (-0.11 to 1.0, 1.0 = perfect health) improved by 0.07 points with placebo and 0.11 points with antidepressants (MD 0.04, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.07; 3 RCTs, 815 participants). This is clinically unimportant. High-certainty evidence showed that total adverse events increased in the antidepressant group (64%) compared to the placebo group (49%) (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.41; 9 RCTs, 2102 participants). The number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) was 7 (95% CI 5 to 11). Low-certainty evidence (downgraded twice for imprecision for very low numbers of events) found no evidence of a difference in serious adverse events between groups (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.94; 9 RCTs, 2101 participants). The NNTH was 1000. Moderate-certainty evidence (downgraded for imprecision) showed that 11% of participants receiving antidepressants withdrew from trials due to an adverse event compared to 5% receiving placebo (RR 2.15, 95% CI 1.56 to 2.97; 6 RCTs, 1977 participants). The NNTH was 17 (95% CI 10 to 35).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is high-certainty evidence that use of antidepressants for knee osteoarthritis leads to a non-clinically important improvement in mean pain and function. However, a small number of people will have a 50% or greater important improvement in pain and function. This finding was consistent across all trials. Pain in osteoarthritis may be due to a variety of causes that differ between individuals. It may be that the cause of pain that responds to this therapy is only present in a small number of people. There is moderate-certainty evidence that antidepressants have a small positive effect on quality of life with heterogeneity between trials. High-certainty evidence indicates antidepressants result in more adverse events and moderate-certainty evidence indicates more withdrawal due to adverse events. There was little to no difference in serious adverse events (low-certainty evidence due to low numbers of events). This suggests that if antidepressants were being considered, there needs to be careful patient selection to optimise clinical benefit given the known propensity for adverse events with antidepressant use. Future trials should include alternative antidepressant agents or phenotyping of pain in people with osteoarthritis, or both.
尽管疼痛在骨关节炎中很常见,但大多数人未能达到足够的镇痛效果。越来越多的人认识到疼痛敏化的作用,这导致了对具有中枢作用的影响疼痛处理的药物的研究。抗抑郁药在存在疼痛敏化的其他疾病中有助于疼痛管理。
评估抗抑郁药治疗成人膝和髋关节骨关节炎的疗效和安全性。
我们使用了标准的、广泛的 Cochrane 检索方法。最新检索时间为 2021 年 1 月。
我们纳入了比较抗抑郁药与安慰剂或其他对照药物治疗骨关节炎的成人随机对照试验。我们纳入了关注疗效(疼痛和功能)、治疗相关不良事件并记录参与者停药情况的试验。我们排除了持续时间少于 6 周的试验或参与者同时患有精神健康障碍的试验。
我们使用了标准的 Cochrane 方法。主要结局为疼痛;应答率;身体功能;生活质量;以及因不良事件、出现任何不良事件或因任何原因退出的参与者比例。次要结局为符合 OARSI(骨关节炎研究协会国际)反应标准的比例、关节结构的放射学变化以及因任何原因退出研究的参与者比例。我们使用 GRADE 评估证据的确定性。
9 项试验(2122 名参与者)符合纳入标准。7 项试验仅观察了膝骨关节炎。另外两项也包括髋骨关节炎患者。所有试验均将抗抑郁药与安慰剂进行比较,安慰剂可与非甾体抗炎药联合使用。试验规模为 36 至 388 名参与者。大多数参与者为女性,平均年龄为 54.5 至 65.9 岁。试验持续时间为 8 至 16 周。6 项试验检查了度洛西汀。我们对膝和髋关节骨关节炎的 9 项试验进行了荟萃分析。一项试验在所有领域均具有低偏倚风险。五项试验存在失访和报告偏倚的风险。有高确定性证据表明,与安慰剂相比,抗抑郁药可使疼痛得到临床意义不显著的改善。疼痛(0 至 10 分制,0 表示无痛)的平均降低幅度为 1.7 分(安慰剂组)和 2.3 分(抗抑郁药组)(平均差异(MD)-0.59,95%置信区间(CI)-0.88 至-0.31;9 项试验,2122 名参与者)。临床反应定义为 24 小时平均疼痛缓解达到 50%或更高。有高确定性证据表明,接受抗抑郁药治疗的参与者中有 45%出现临床反应,而接受安慰剂治疗的参与者有 28.6%出现临床反应(RR 1.55,95%CI 1.32 至 1.82;6 项 RCT,1904 名参与者)。这对应于抗抑郁药治疗组的疼痛缓解幅度提高了 16%(8.9%至 26%),而应答者比例增加了 16%(8.9%至 26%),需要治疗的人数(NNTB)为 6(95%CI 4 至 11)。高确定性证据表明,功能(0 至 100 分的西部安大略省和麦克马斯特大学关节炎指数,0 表示最佳功能)的平均改善幅度为 10.51 分(安慰剂组)和 16.16 分(抗抑郁药组)(MD-5.65 分,95%CI-7.08 至-4.23;6 项 RCT,1909 名参与者)。这表明存在较小的、临床意义不显著的反应。中度确定性证据(因精度不佳而降级)表明,使用 EuroQol 5 维度量表(-0.11 至 1.0,1.0 表示完美健康)测量的生活质量提高了 0.07 分(安慰剂组)和 0.11 分(抗抑郁药组)(MD 0.04,95%CI 0.01 至 0.07;3 项 RCT,815 名参与者)。这在临床上并不重要。高确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药组的总不良事件发生率(64%)高于安慰剂组(49%)(RR 1.27,95%CI 1.15 至 1.41;9 项 RCT,2102 名参与者)。需要治疗的人数(NNTH)为 7(95%CI 5 至 11)。低确定性证据(因事件数量非常少而两次降级为精度不佳)发现两组之间无严重不良事件差异(RR 0.94,95%CI 0.46 至 1.94;9 项 RCT,2101 名参与者)。NNTH 为 1000。中度确定性证据(因精度不佳而降级两次)表明,接受抗抑郁药治疗的参与者中有 11%因不良事件退出试验,而接受安慰剂治疗的参与者中有 5%退出(RR 2.15,95%CI 1.56 至 2.97;6 项 RCT,1977 名参与者)。NNTH 为 17(95%CI 10 至 35)。
有高确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药治疗膝骨关节炎可导致疼痛和功能的临床意义不显著改善。然而,只有少数人会有 50%或更大的疼痛和功能重要改善。这一发现在所有试验中都是一致的。骨关节炎中的疼痛可能是由个体之间不同的多种原因引起的。可能只有一小部分人对这种治疗有反应。有中度确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药对生活质量有较小的积极影响,但存在异质性。高确定性证据表明抗抑郁药会导致更多的不良事件和更多因不良事件而停药(因不良事件而停药的 NNTH 为 17(95%CI 10 至 35)。有中度确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药会导致更多的不良事件和更多因不良事件而停药(因不良事件而停药的 NNTH 为 17(95%CI 10 至 35)。有中度确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药会导致更多的不良事件和更多因不良事件而停药(因不良事件而停药的 NNTH 为 17(95%CI 10 至 35)。有中度确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药会导致更多的不良事件和更多因不良事件而停药(因不良事件而停药的 NNTH 为 17(95%CI 10 至 35)。有中度确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药会导致更多的不良事件和更多因不良事件而停药(因不良事件而停药的 NNTH 为 17(95%CI 10 至 35)。有中度确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药会导致更多的不良事件和更多因不良事件而停药(因不良事件而停药的 NNTH 为 17(95%CI 10 至 35)。有中度确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药会导致更多的不良事件和更多因不良事件而停药(因不良事件而停药的 NNTH 为 17(95%CI 10 至 35)。有中度确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药会导致更多的不良事件和更多因不良事件而停药(因不良事件而停药的 NNTH 为 17(95%CI 10 至 35)。有中度确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药会导致更多的不良事件和更多因不良事件而停药(因不良事件而停药的 NNTH 为 17(95%CI 10 至 35)。有中度确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药会导致更多的不良事件和更多因不良事件而停药(因不良事件而停药的 NNTH 为 17(95%CI 10 至 35)。有中度确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药会导致更多的不良事件和更多因不良事件而停药(因不良事件而停药的 NNTH 为 17(95%CI 10 至 35)。有中度确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药会导致更多的不良事件和更多因不良事件而停药(因不良事件而停药的 NNTH 为 17(95%CI 10 至 35)。有中度确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药会导致更多的不良事件和更多因不良事件而停药(因不良事件而停药的 NNTH 为 17(95%CI 10 至 35)。有中度确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药会导致更多的不良事件和更多因不良事件而停药(因不良事件而停药的 NNTH 为 17(95%CI 10 至 35)。有中度确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药会导致更多的不良事件和更多因不良事件而停药(因不良事件而停药的 NNTH 为 17(95%CI 10 至 35)。有中度确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药会导致更多的不良事件和更多因不良事件而停药(因不良事件而停药的 NNTH 为 17(95%CI 10 至 35)。有中度确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药会导致更多的不良事件和更多因不良事件而停药(因不良事件而停药的 NNTH 为 17(95%CI 10 至 35)。有中度确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药会导致更多的不良事件和更多因不良事件而停药(因不良事件而停药的 NNTH 为 17(95%CI 10 至 35)。有中度确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药会导致更多的不良事件和更多因不良事件而停药(因不良事件而停药的 NNTH 为 17(95%CI 10 至 35)。有中度确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药会导致更多的不良事件和更多因不良事件而停药(因不良事件而停药的 NNTH 为 17(95%CI 10 至 35)。有中度确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药会导致更多的不良事件和更多因不良事件而停药(因不良事件而停药的 NNTH 为 17(95%CI 10 至 35)。有中度确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药会导致更多的不良事件和更多因不良事件而停药(因不良事件而停药的 NNTH 为 17(95%CI 10 至 35)。有中度确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药会导致更多的不良事件和更多因不良事件而停药(因不良事件而停药的 NNTH 为 17(95%CI 10 至 35)。有中度确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药会导致更多的不良事件和更多因不良事件而停药(因不良事件而停药的 NNTH 为 17(95%CI 10 至 35)。有中度确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药会导致更多的不良事件和更多因不良事件