Trotter Patrick B, Norton Lindsey A, Loo Ann S, Munn Jonathan I, Voge Elena, Ah-See Kim W, Macfarlane Tatiana V
School of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Aberdeen Aberdeen United Kingdom.
School of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Aberdeen Aberdeen United Kingdom. ; University of Bremen Bremen Germany.
J Oral Maxillofac Res. 2013 Jan 1;3(4):e1. doi: 10.5037/jomr.2012.3401.
Pain is a common complication in head and neck cancer. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the evidence from randomised control trials investigating pharmacological and non-pharmacological methods of pain management in head and neck cancer.
Medline, Embase and the Cochrane library databases were searched. Squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck excluding nasopharyngeal and salivary gland cancers were included. The limits were "human" and "randomised clinical trials". A quality assessment was carried out.
13 studies were included with a total of 644 participants. The primary outcome for most of these papers was pain control post-treatment. Levels of bias varied between the studies. Majority (12 out of the 13 studies) reported intervention to be superior to the control or standard therapy in pain management. Only 46% of the studies were carried out on an intention to treat basis. Two studies reported high dropout rates, with one at 66%.
There is insufficient evidence from randomised clinical trials to suggest an optimal pharmacological intervention for head and neck cancer pain post-treatment. Further high quality randomised clinical trials should be conducted to develop an optimal management strategy for head and neck cancer pain.
疼痛是头颈癌常见的并发症。本文旨在评估随机对照试验中关于头颈癌疼痛管理的药理学和非药理学方法的证据。
检索了Medline、Embase和Cochrane图书馆数据库。纳入了排除鼻咽癌和唾液腺癌的头颈鳞状细胞癌。限定条件为“人类”和“随机临床试验”。进行了质量评估。
纳入13项研究,共644名参与者。这些论文大多的主要结局是治疗后疼痛控制。各研究之间的偏倚程度不同。多数(13项研究中的12项)报告干预措施在疼痛管理方面优于对照或标准治疗。只有46%的研究是基于意向性分析进行的。两项研究报告了高失访率,其中一项为66%。
随机临床试验的证据不足,无法为头颈癌治疗后疼痛推荐最佳药理学干预措施。应开展进一步的高质量随机临床试验,以制定头颈癌疼痛的最佳管理策略。