Gowing L, Farrell M, Ali R, White J
Evidence-Based Practice Unit, Drug and Alcohol Services Council, 161 Greenhill Road, Parkside, SA, Australia, 5063.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004 Oct 18(4):CD002024. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002024.pub2.
Withdrawal (detoxification) is necessary prior to drug-free treatment. It may also represent the end point of long-term treatment such as methadone maintenance. The availability of managed withdrawal is essential to an effective treatment system.
To assess the effectiveness of interventions involving the use of alpha2 adrenergic agonists (clonidine, lofexidine, guanfacine) to manage opioid withdrawal in terms of withdrawal signs and symptoms, completion of withdrawal and adverse effects.
Multiple electronic databases (including MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Australian Medical Index, Cochrane Clinical Trials Register) were systematically searched. Reference lists of retrieved studies, reviews and conference abstracts were handsearched and relevant pharmaceutical companies contacted.
Controlled trials comparing alpha2 adrenergic agonists with reducing doses of methadone, symptomatic medications or placebo, or comparing different alpha2 adrenergic agonists to modify the signs and symptoms of withdrawal in participants who were primarily opioid dependent.
One reviewer assessed studies for inclusion and undertook data extraction. Inclusion decisions and the overall process were confirmed by consultation between all four reviewers.
Twenty-two studies, involving 1709 participants, were included. Eighteen were randomised controlled trials; for the remaining studies allocation was by participant choice in two, one used alternate allocation and in one the method of allocation was unclear. Twelve studies compared a treatment regime based on an alpha2 adrenergic agonist with one based on reducing doses of methadone. Diversity in study design, assessment and reporting of outcomes limited the extent of quantitative analysis. For the comparison of alpha2 adrenergic agonist regimes with reducing doses of methadone, there were insufficient data for statistical analysis, but withdrawal intensity appears similar to, or marginally greater with alpha2 adrenergic agonists, while signs and symptoms of withdrawal occur and resolve earlier in treatment. Participants stay in treatment longer with methadone. No significant difference was detected in rates of completion of withdrawal with adrenergic agonists compared to reducing doses of methadone, or clonidine compared to lofexidine. Clonidine is associated with more adverse effects (low blood pressure, dizziness, dry mouth, lack of energy) than reducing doses of methadone. Lofexidine does not reduce blood pressure to the same extent as clonidine, but is otherwise similar to clonidine.
REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS: No significant difference in efficacy was detected for treatment regimes based on the alpha2 adrenergic agonists clonidine and lofexidine, and those based on reducing doses of methadone over a period of around 10 days, for the management of withdrawal from heroin or methadone. Participants stay in treatment longer with methadone regimes and experience less adverse effects. The lower incidence of hypotension makes lofexidine more suited to use in outpatient settings than clonidine. There are insufficient data available to support a conclusion on the efficacy of other alpha2 adrenergic agonists.
在进行无药物治疗之前,脱毒(戒毒)是必要的。它也可能是美沙酮维持治疗等长期治疗的终点。有效的脱毒治疗对于有效的治疗体系至关重要。
评估使用α2肾上腺素能激动剂(可乐定、洛非西定、胍法辛)进行阿片类药物脱毒治疗在脱毒体征和症状、脱毒完成情况及不良反应方面的有效性。
系统检索了多个电子数据库(包括医学主题词表、荷兰医学文摘数据库、心理学文摘数据库、澳大利亚医学索引、考科蓝临床试验注册库)。对检索到的研究、综述及会议摘要的参考文献列表进行了手工检索,并与相关制药公司进行了联系。
对照试验,比较α2肾上腺素能激动剂与递减剂量美沙酮、对症药物或安慰剂,或比较不同的α2肾上腺素能激动剂,以改善主要依赖阿片类药物的参与者的脱毒体征和症状。
一名评审员评估纳入研究并进行数据提取。所有四名评审员通过协商确认纳入决定及整个过程。
纳入22项研究,涉及1709名参与者。18项为随机对照试验;其余研究中,2项由参与者自行选择分配方式,1项采用交替分配,1项分配方法不明。12项研究比较了基于α2肾上腺素能激动剂的治疗方案与基于递减剂量美沙酮的治疗方案。研究设计、结局评估及报告的多样性限制了定量分析的程度。对于α2肾上腺素能激动剂方案与递减剂量美沙酮方案的比较,缺乏进行统计分析的数据,但脱毒强度似乎与α2肾上腺素能激动剂相似,或略高,而脱毒体征和症状在治疗中出现及缓解更早。使用美沙酮时参与者接受治疗的时间更长。与递减剂量美沙酮相比,肾上腺素能激动剂的脱毒完成率或可乐定与洛非西定相比,未检测到显著差异。与递减剂量美沙酮相比,可乐定的不良反应(低血压、头晕、口干、乏力)更多。洛非西定降低血压的程度不如可乐定,但在其他方面与可乐定相似。
在为期约10天的海洛因或美沙酮脱毒治疗中,基于α2肾上腺素能激动剂可乐定和洛非西定的治疗方案与基于递减剂量美沙酮的治疗方案在疗效上未检测到显著差异。使用美沙酮方案时参与者接受治疗的时间更长,且不良反应更少。低血压发生率较低使得洛非西定比可乐定更适合在门诊环境中使用。尚无足够数据支持对其他α2肾上腺素能激动剂疗效得出结论。