Richards Bethan L, Whittle Samuel L, Buchbinder Rachelle
Institute of Rheumatology and Orthopedics, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, Australia.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Jan 18;1(1):CD008921. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008921.pub2.
Pain management is a high priority for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Despite deficiencies in research data, neuromodulators have gained widespread clinical acceptance as adjuvants in the management of patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain.
The aim of this review was to determine the efficacy and safety of neuromodulators in pain management in patients with RA. Neuromodulators included in this review were anticonvulsants (gabapentin, pregabalin, phenytoin, sodium valproate, lamotrigine, carbamazepine, levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine, tiagabine and topiramate), ketamine, bupropion, methylphenidate, nefopam, capsaicin and the cannabinoids.
We performed a computer-assisted search of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2010, 4th quarter), MEDLINE (1950 to week 1 November 2010), EMBASE (Week 44, 2010) and PsycINFO (1806 to week 2 November 2010). We also searched the 2008 and 2009 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and European League against Rheumatism (EULAR) conference abstracts and performed a handsearch of reference lists of articles.
We included randomised controlled trials which compared any neuromodulator to another therapy (active or placebo, including non-pharmacological therapies) in adult patients with RA that had at least one clinically relevant outcome measure.
Two blinded review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in the trials. Meta-analyses were used to examine the efficacy of a neuromodulator on pain, depression and function as well as their safety.
Four trials with high risk of bias were included in this review. Two trials evaluated oral nefopam (52 participants) and one trial each evaluated topical capsaicin (31 participants) and oromucosal cannabis (58 participants).The pooled analyses identified a significant reduction in pain levels favouring nefopam over placebo (weighted mean difference (WMD) -21.16, 95% CI -35.61 to -6.71; number needed to treat (NNT) 2, 95% CI 1.4 to 9.5) after two weeks. There were insufficient data to assess withdrawals due to adverse events. Nefopam was associated with significantly more adverse events (RR 4.11, 95% CI 1.58 to 10.69; NNTH 9, 95% CI 2 to 367), which were predominantly nausea and sweating.In a mixed population trial, qualitative analysis of patients with RA showed a significantly greater reduction in pain favouring topical capsaicin over placebo at one and two weeks (MD -23.80, 95% CI -44.81 to -2.79; NNT 3, 95% CI 2 to 47; MD -34.40, 95% CI -54.66 to -14.14; NNT 2, 95% CI 1.4 to 6 respectively). No separate safety data were available for patients with RA, however 44% of patients developed burning at the site of application and 2% withdrew because of this.One small, low quality trial assessed oromucosal cannabis against placebo and found a small, significant difference favouring cannabis in the verbal rating score 'pain at present' (MD -0.72, 95% CI -1.31 to -0.13) after five weeks. Patients receiving cannabis were significantly more likely to suffer an adverse event (risk ratio (RR) 1.82, 95% CI 1.10 to 3.00; NNTH 3, 95% CI 3 to 13). These were most commonly dizziness (26%), dry mouth (13%) and light headedness (10%).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is currently weak evidence that oral nefopam, topical capsaicin and oromucosal cannabis are all superior to placebo in reducing pain in patients with RA. However, each agent is associated with a significant side effect profile. The confidence in our estimates is not strong given the difficulties with blinding, the small numbers of participants evaluated and the lack of adverse event data. In some patients, however, even a small degree of pain relief may be considered worthwhile. Until further research is available, given the relatively mild nature of the adverse events, capsaicin could be considered as an add-on therapy for patients with persistent local pain and inadequate response or intolerance to other treatments. Oral nefopam and oromucosal cannabis have more significant side effect profiles however and the potential harms seem to outweigh any modest benefit achieved.
疼痛管理是类风湿关节炎(RA)患者的首要任务。尽管研究数据存在不足,但神经调节剂作为慢性肌肉骨骼疼痛患者管理中的辅助药物已获得广泛的临床认可。
本综述的目的是确定神经调节剂在RA患者疼痛管理中的疗效和安全性。本综述纳入的神经调节剂包括抗惊厥药(加巴喷丁、普瑞巴林、苯妥英、丙戊酸钠、拉莫三嗪、卡马西平、左乙拉西坦、奥卡西平、噻加宾和托吡酯)、氯胺酮、安非他酮、哌甲酯、奈福泮、辣椒素和大麻素。
我们对Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)(《Cochrane图书馆》2010年第4季度)、MEDLINE(1950年至2010年11月第1周)、EMBASE(2010年第44周)和PsycINFO(1806年至2010年11月第2周)进行了计算机辅助检索。我们还检索了2008年和2009年美国风湿病学会(ACR)和欧洲抗风湿病联盟(EULAR)会议摘要,并对文章的参考文献列表进行了手工检索。
我们纳入了将任何神经调节剂与另一种治疗方法(活性或安慰剂,包括非药物治疗)进行比较的随机对照试验,这些试验针对的是至少有一项临床相关结局指标的成年RA患者。
两位盲法综述作者独立提取数据并评估试验中的偏倚风险。荟萃分析用于检验神经调节剂对疼痛、抑郁和功能的疗效及其安全性。
本综述纳入了4项偏倚风险高的试验。两项试验评估了口服奈福泮(52名参与者),一项试验评估了外用辣椒素(31名参与者),一项试验评估了口腔黏膜大麻(58名参与者)。汇总分析发现,两周后,与安慰剂相比,奈福泮使疼痛水平显著降低(加权平均差(WMD)-21.16,95%可信区间-35.61至-6.71;需治疗人数(NNT)2,95%可信区间1.4至9.5)。由于不良事件导致的退出数据不足。奈福泮与显著更多的不良事件相关(相对危险度(RR)4.11,95%可信区间1.58至10.69;需治疗的有害事件数(NNTH)9,95%可信区间2至367),主要是恶心和出汗。在一项混合人群试验中,对RA患者的定性分析显示,在第1周和第2周,与安慰剂相比,外用辣椒素使疼痛显著降低(平均差(MD)-23.80,95%可信区间-44.81至-2.79;NNT 3,95%可信区间2至47;MD -34.40,95%可信区间-54.66至-14.14;NNT 2,95%可信区间分别为1.4至6)。没有针对RA患者的单独安全性数据,然而,44%的患者在用药部位出现烧灼感,2%的患者因此退出。一项小型、低质量试验将口腔黏膜大麻与安慰剂进行了比较,发现5周后,在“当前疼痛”的言语评分中,大麻有微小但显著的差异(MD -0.72,95%可信区间-1.31至-0.13)。接受大麻治疗的患者发生不良事件的可能性显著更高(风险比(RR)1.82,95%可信区间1.10至3.00;NNTH 3,95%可信区间3至13)。这些不良事件最常见的是头晕(26%)、口干(13%)和头晕目眩(10%)。
目前证据不足,表明口服奈福泮、外用辣椒素和口腔黏膜大麻在减轻RA患者疼痛方面均优于安慰剂。然而,每种药物都有显著的副作用。鉴于存在盲法困难、评估的参与者数量少以及缺乏不良事件数据,我们估计的可信度不高。然而,在一些患者中,即使是轻微程度的疼痛缓解也可能被认为是值得的。在有进一步研究之前,鉴于不良事件相对较轻,辣椒素可被视为持续性局部疼痛且对其他治疗反应不足或不耐受患者的附加治疗。然而,口服奈福泮和口腔黏膜大麻有更显著的副作用,潜在危害似乎超过了所取得的任何适度益处。