Eisenberg Elon, McNicol Ewan D, Carr Daniel B
Pain Relief Unit, Rambam Medical Center, and Haifa Pain Research Group, the Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel.
JAMA. 2005 Jun 22;293(24):3043-52. doi: 10.1001/jama.293.24.3043.
In the United States, an estimated 2 million persons have neuropathic pain that is often resistant to therapy. The use of opioids for neuropathic pain remains controversial, in part because studies have been small, have yielded equivocal results, and have not established the long-term risk-benefit ratio of this treatment.
To assess the efficacy and safety of opioid agonists for the treatment of neuropathic pain based on published randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
We searched MEDLINE (1966 to December 2004) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (fourth quarter, 2004) for articles in any language, along with reference lists of reviews and retrieved articles, using a combination of 9 search terms for RCTs with 32 terms for opioids and 15 terms for neuropathic pain.
Trials were included in which opioid agonists were given to treat central or peripheral neuropathic pain of any etiology, pain was assessed using validated instruments, and adverse events were reported. Studies in which drugs other than opioid agonists were combined with opioids or opioids were administered epidurally or intrathecally were excluded.
Data were extracted by 2 independent investigators and included demographic variables, diagnoses, interventions, efficacy, and adverse effects.
Twenty-two articles met inclusion criteria and were classified as short-term (less than 24 hours; n = 14) or intermediate-term (median = 28 days; range = 8-56 days; n = 8) trials. The short-term trials had contradictory results. In contrast, all 8 intermediate-term trials demonstrated opioid efficacy for spontaneous neuropathic pain. A fixed-effects model meta-analysis of 6 intermediate-term studies showed mean posttreatment visual analog scale scores of pain intensity after opioids to be 14 units lower on a scale from 0 to 100 than after placebo (95% confidence interval [CI], -18 to -10; P<.001). According to number needed to harm (NNH), the most common adverse event was nausea (NNH, 3.6; 95% CI, 2.9-4.8), followed by constipation (NNH, 4.6; 95% CI, 3.4-7.1), drowsiness (NNH, 5.3; 95% CI, 3.7-8.3), vomiting (NNH, 6.2; 95% CI, 4.6-11.1), and dizziness (NNH, 6.7; 95% CI, 4.8-10.0).
Short-term studies provide only equivocal evidence regarding the efficacy of opioids in reducing the intensity of neuropathic pain. Intermediate-term studies demonstrate significant efficacy of opioids over placebo for neuropathic pain, which is likely to be clinically important. Reported adverse events of opioids are common but not life-threatening. Further RCTs are needed to establish their long-term efficacy, safety (including addiction potential), and effects on quality of life.
在美国,估计有200万人患有神经性疼痛,这种疼痛通常对治疗有抵抗性。使用阿片类药物治疗神经性疼痛仍存在争议,部分原因是相关研究规模较小,结果不明确,且尚未确定这种治疗方法的长期风险效益比。
基于已发表的随机对照试验(RCT)评估阿片类激动剂治疗神经性疼痛的疗效和安全性。
我们检索了MEDLINE(1966年至2004年12月)和Cochrane对照试验中央注册库(2004年第四季度),搜索任何语言的文章,并结合综述和检索文章的参考文献列表,使用9个RCT搜索词、32个阿片类药物搜索词和15个神经性疼痛搜索词进行组合搜索。
纳入使用阿片类激动剂治疗任何病因的中枢性或外周性神经性疼痛的试验,疼痛使用经过验证的工具进行评估,并报告不良事件。排除将阿片类激动剂以外的药物与阿片类药物联合使用或硬膜外或鞘内给予阿片类药物的研究。
由2名独立研究人员提取数据,包括人口统计学变量、诊断、干预措施、疗效和不良反应。
22篇文章符合纳入标准,分为短期(少于24小时;n = 14)或中期(中位数 = 28天;范围 = 8 - 56天;n = 8)试验。短期试验结果相互矛盾。相比之下,所有8项中期试验均证明阿片类药物对自发性神经性疼痛有效。对6项中期研究进行的固定效应模型荟萃分析显示,阿片类药物治疗后疼痛强度的视觉模拟量表平均得分在0至100分的量表上比安慰剂低14个单位(95%置信区间[CI],-18至-10;P <.001)。根据伤害所需人数(NNH),最常见的不良事件是恶心(NNH,3.6;95% CI,2.9 - 4.8),其次是便秘(NNH,4.6;95% CI,3.4 - 7.1)、嗜睡(NNH,5.3;95% CI,3.7 - 8.3)、呕吐(NNH,6.2;95% CI,4.6 - 11.1)和头晕(NNH,6.7;95% CI,4.8 - 10.0)。
短期研究关于阿片类药物在减轻神经性疼痛强度方面的疗效仅提供了不明确的证据。中期研究表明,阿片类药物治疗神经性疼痛比安慰剂具有显著疗效,这可能具有临床重要性。报告的阿片类药物不良事件很常见,但不危及生命。需要进一步的随机对照试验来确定其长期疗效、安全性(包括成瘾潜力)以及对生活质量的影响。