Tzellos Thrasivoulos G, Papazisis Georgios, Amaniti Ekaterini, Kouvelas Dimitrios
Department of Pharmacology, School of Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2008 Sep;64(9):851-8. doi: 10.1007/s00228-008-0523-5. Epub 2008 Jul 8.
BACKGROUND: Spinal-cord injury (SCI) is a leading cause of neuropathic pain (NP). Current pharmaceutical treatments for NP in SCI patients are not effective. Two promising options are gabapentin (GP) and pregabalin (PB). Their predominant mechanism of action is believed to be the inhibition of calcium currents, leading in turn to reduced neurotransmitter release and attenuation of postsynaptic excitability. This could explain much of their efficacy in the treatment of both seizure disorders and pain syndromes. However, evidence for their efficacy in attenuating NP of SCI is still controversial. OBJECTIVE: To efficiently integrate valid information and provide a basis for rational decision making, through determining PB and GP efficacy in treating NP in SCI. METHODS: Literature was systematically reviewed. Medline, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane Database were searched using search terms 'gabapentin', 'pregabalin', 'neurontin', 'lyrica', 'neuropathic pain' and 'spinal-cord injury'. Studies were assessed independently by two authors. RESULTS: Five studies were eligible for inclusion. Two of them studied PB and three GP. Both GP and PB appear to be efficacious for NP in SCI. A clear comparison between the two drugs could not be performed. The literature data suggest that PB is more efficacious than GP in many important variables for NP in SCI, although PB use is followed by more side effects than GP. PB reduced Visual Analogue Score (VAS) in both studies (P < 0.001 and P = 0.016). On the other hand, for GP a maximum dosage of 3,600 mg/day reduced VAS score (P = 0.000), whereas a maximum dosage of 1,200 mg/day failed to do so. CONCLUSION: There is a lack of studies comparing GP and PB in treating NP in SCI. This systematic review indicates the possible efficacy of PB and GP in NP of SCI. Recommendations for future research to inform clinical practice should include cost-effectiveness studies and dose-response analysis in order to determine the schema employed and the duration of treatment.
背景:脊髓损伤(SCI)是神经性疼痛(NP)的主要病因。目前用于治疗SCI患者NP的药物治疗效果不佳。两种有前景的药物是加巴喷丁(GP)和普瑞巴林(PB)。它们主要的作用机制被认为是抑制钙电流,进而导致神经递质释放减少和突触后兴奋性减弱。这可以解释它们在治疗癫痫和疼痛综合征方面的大部分疗效。然而,它们在减轻SCI患者NP方面的疗效证据仍存在争议。 目的:通过确定PB和GP治疗SCI患者NP的疗效,有效整合有效信息并为合理决策提供依据。 方法:对文献进行系统综述。使用搜索词“加巴喷丁”“普瑞巴林”“加巴喷丁胶囊”“乐瑞卡”“神经性疼痛”和“脊髓损伤”检索Medline、Embase、CINAHL和Cochrane数据库。由两位作者独立评估研究。 结果:五项研究符合纳入标准。其中两项研究PB,三项研究GP。GP和PB似乎对SCI患者的NP均有效。无法对这两种药物进行明确比较。文献数据表明,在SCI患者NP的许多重要变量方面,PB比GP更有效,尽管PB使用后出现的副作用比GP多。在两项研究中,PB均降低了视觉模拟评分(VAS)(P<0.001和P = 0.016)。另一方面,对于GP,最大剂量为3600mg/天时降低了VAS评分(P = 0.000),而最大剂量为1200mg/天时则未降低。 结论:缺乏比较GP和PB治疗SCI患者NP的研究。本系统综述表明PB和GP在SCI患者NP中可能有效。为指导临床实践,未来研究的建议应包括成本效益研究和剂量反应分析,以确定使用的方案和治疗持续时间。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-8-5
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018-3-5
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-8-5
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-1-3
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-10-9
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-6-9
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-6-29
Pharmaceuticals (Basel). 2024-5-11
Int J Mol Sci. 2021-9-8
J Spinal Cord Med. 2022-3
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-6-9
Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2007-12
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2007-4
Curr Pain Headache Rep. 2005-6