Suppr超能文献

阿系统性评论随机试验关于有效性的阿类阿片药物为癌症疼痛。

A systematic review of randomized trials on the effectiveness of opioids for cancer pain.

机构信息

University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Department of Anesthesiology & Pain Medicine, Houston, TX 77030-0409, USA.

出版信息

Pain Physician. 2012 Jul;15(3 Suppl):ES39-58.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

In all recommended guidelines put forth for the treatment of cancer pain, opioids continue to be an important part of a physician's armamentarium. Though opioids are used regularly for cancer pain, there is a paucity of literature proving efficacy for long-term use. Cancer is no longer considered a "terminal disease"; 50% to 65% of patients survive for at least 2 years, and there are about 12 million cancer survivors in the United States. There is a concern about side effects, tolerance, abuse and addiction with long-term opioid use and a need to evaluate the effectiveness of opioids for cancer pain.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this systematic review was to look at the effectiveness of opioids for cancer pain.

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic review of randomized trials of opioids for cancer pain.

METHODS

A comprehensive review of the current literature for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of opioids for cancer pain was done. The literature search was done using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, clinical trials, national clearing house, Web of Science, previous narrative systematic reviews, and cross references. The studies were assessed using the modified Cochrane and Jadad criteria. Analysis of evidence was done utilizing the modified quality of evidence developed by United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF).

OUTCOME MEASURES

Pain relief was the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcome measures are quality of life (QoL) and side effects including tolerance and addiction.

RESULTS

The level of evidence for pain relief based on the USPSTF criteria was fair for transdermal fentanyl and poor for morphine, tramadol, oxycodone, methadone, and codeine.

LIMITATIONS

Randomized trials in a cancer setting are difficult to perform and justify. There is a paucity of long-term trials and this review included a follow-up period of only 4 weeks.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review of RCTs of opioids for cancer pain showed fair evidence for the efficacy of transdermal fentanyl and poor evidence for morphine, tramadol, oxycodone, methadone, and codeine.

摘要

背景

在所有推荐的癌症疼痛治疗指南中,阿片类药物仍然是医生治疗手段的重要组成部分。尽管阿片类药物经常用于治疗癌症疼痛,但长期使用的疗效证据很少。癌症不再被认为是“绝症”;至少有 50%至 65%的患者存活至少 2 年,美国有大约 1200 万癌症幸存者。长期使用阿片类药物存在副作用、耐受性、滥用和成瘾的担忧,需要评估阿片类药物治疗癌症疼痛的有效性。

目的

本系统评价旨在研究阿片类药物治疗癌症疼痛的疗效。

研究设计

对阿片类药物治疗癌症疼痛的随机试验进行系统评价。

方法

对阿片类药物治疗癌症疼痛的随机对照试验(RCT)的现有文献进行了全面综述。使用 PubMed、EMBASE、Cochrane 图书馆、临床试验、国家信息交换所、Web of Science、以前的叙述性系统评价和交叉引用进行文献检索。使用改良的 Cochrane 和 Jadad 标准评估研究。利用美国预防服务工作组(USPSTF)制定的改良证据质量分析进行证据分析。

主要结局指标

疼痛缓解是主要结局指标。次要结局指标是生活质量(QoL)和包括耐受性和成瘾在内的副作用。

结果

根据 USPSTF 标准,透皮芬太尼的疼痛缓解证据水平为中等,而吗啡、曲马多、羟考酮、美沙酮和可待因的证据水平较差。

局限性

在癌症环境中进行随机试验是困难的,也很难证明其合理性。长期试验很少,本综述只包括 4 周的随访期。

结论

本系统评价了阿片类药物治疗癌症疼痛的 RCT,结果表明透皮芬太尼的疗效证据为中等,而吗啡、曲马多、羟考酮、美沙酮和可待因的疗效证据较差。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验