Derry Sheena, Conaghan Philip, Da Silva José António P, Wiffen Philip J, Moore R Andrew
Pain Research and Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences (Nuffield Division of Anaesthetics), University of Oxford, Pain Research Unit, Churchill Hospital, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK, OX3 7LE.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Apr 22;4(4):CD007400. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007400.pub3.
Use of topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) to treat chronic musculoskeletal conditions has become widely accepted because they can provide pain relief without associated systemic adverse events. This review is an update of 'Topical NSAIDs for chronic musculoskeletal pain in adults', originally published in Issue 9, 2012.
To review the evidence from randomised, double-blind, controlled trials on the efficacy and safety of topically applied NSAIDs for chronic musculoskeletal pain in adults.
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and our own in-house database; the date of the last search was February 2016. We also searched the references lists of included studies and reviews, and sought unpublished studies by asking personal contacts and searching online clinical trial registers and manufacturers' web sites.
We included randomised, double-blind, active or inert carrier (placebo) controlled trials in which treatments were administered to adults with chronic musculoskeletal pain of moderate or severe intensity. Studies had to meet stringent quality criteria and there had to be at least 10 participants in each treatment arm, with application of treatment at least once daily.
Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and extracted data. We used numbers of participants achieving each outcome to calculate risk ratio and numbers needed to treat (NNT) or harm (NNH) compared to carrier or other active treatment. We were particularly interested to compare different formulations (gel, cream, plaster) of individual NSAIDs. The primary outcome was 'clinical success', defined as at least a 50% reduction in pain, or an equivalent measure such as a 'very good' or 'excellent' global assessment of treatment, or 'none' or 'slight' pain on rest or movement, measured on a categorical scale.
We identified five new studies for this update, which now has information from 10,631 participants in 39 studies, a 38% increase in participants from the earlier review; 33 studies compared a topical NSAID with carrier. All studies examined topical NSAIDs for treatment of osteoarthritis, and for pooled analyses studies were generally of moderate or high methodological quality, although we considered some at risk of bias from short duration and small size.In studies lasting 6 to 12 weeks, topical diclofenac and topical ketoprofen were significantly more effective than carrier for reducing pain; about 60% of participants had much reduced pain. With topical diclofenac, the NNT for clinical success in six trials (2343 participants) was 9.8 (95% confidence interval (CI) 7.1 to 16) (moderate quality evidence). With topical ketoprofen, the NNT for clinical success in four trials (2573 participants) was 6.9 (5.4 to 9.3) (moderate quality evidence). There was too little information for analysis of other individual topical NSAIDs compared with carrier. Few trials compared a topical NSAID to an oral NSAID, but overall they showed similar efficacy (low quality evidence). These efficacy results were almost completely derived from people with knee osteoarthritis.There was an increase in local adverse events (mostly mild skin reactions) with topical diclofenac compared with carrier or oral NSAIDs, but no increase with topical ketoprofen (moderate quality evidence). Reporting of systemic adverse events (such as gastrointestinal upsets) was poor, but where reported there was no difference between topical NSAID and carrier (very low quality evidence). Serious adverse events were infrequent and not different between topical NSAID and carrier (very low quality evidence).Clinical success with carrier occurred commonly - in around half the participants in studies lasting 6 to 12 weeks. Both direct and indirect comparison of clinical success with oral placebo indicates that response rates with carrier (topical placebo) are about twice those seen with oral placebo.A substantial amount of data from completed, unpublished studies was unavailable (up to 6000 participants). To the best of our knowledge, much of this probably relates to formulations that have never been marketed.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Topical diclofenac and topical ketoprofen can provide good levels of pain relief beyond carrier in osteoarthritis for a minority of people, but there is no evidence for other chronic painful conditions. There is emerging evidence that at least some of the substantial placebo effects seen in longer duration studies derive from effects imparted by the NSAID carrier itself, and that NSAIDs add to that.
使用外用非甾体抗炎药(NSAIDs)治疗慢性肌肉骨骼疾病已被广泛接受,因为它们能缓解疼痛且无相关全身不良事件。本综述是对2012年第9期发表的《成人慢性肌肉骨骼疼痛的外用NSAIDs》的更新。
回顾关于外用NSAIDs治疗成人慢性肌肉骨骼疼痛的疗效和安全性的随机、双盲、对照试验证据。
我们检索了Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)、MEDLINE、EMBASE以及我们自己的内部数据库;最后一次检索日期为2016年2月。我们还检索了纳入研究和综述的参考文献列表,并通过询问个人联系人以及检索在线临床试验注册库和制造商网站来查找未发表的研究。
我们纳入随机、双盲、活性或惰性载体(安慰剂)对照试验,试验对象为患有中度或重度慢性肌肉骨骼疼痛的成人。研究必须符合严格的质量标准,每个治疗组至少有10名参与者,且治疗至少每日应用一次。
两位综述作者独立评估研究是否纳入并提取数据。我们使用达到各结局的参与者数量来计算风险比以及与载体或其他活性治疗相比的治疗所需人数(NNT)或伤害所需人数(NNH)。我们特别关注比较单个NSAIDs的不同剂型(凝胶、乳膏、贴剂)。主要结局为“临床成功”,定义为疼痛至少减轻50%,或采用如“非常好”或“优秀”的整体治疗评估等等效指标,或采用分类量表测量静息或活动时“无”或“轻微”疼痛。
本次更新我们识别出5项新研究,目前有来自39项研究的10631名参与者的信息,与早期综述相比参与者增加了38%;33项研究比较了外用NSAIDs与载体。所有研究均考察外用NSAIDs治疗骨关节炎,尽管我们认为一些研究因持续时间短和样本量小存在偏倚风险,但总体而言纳入分析的研究方法学质量为中等或高。在持续6至12周的研究中,外用双氯芬酸和外用酮洛芬在减轻疼痛方面显著优于载体;约60%的参与者疼痛大幅减轻。对于外用双氯芬酸,6项试验(2343名参与者)中临床成功的NNT为9.8(95%置信区间(CI)7.1至16)(中等质量证据)。对于外用酮洛芬,4项试验(2573名参与者)中临床成功的NNT为6.9(5.4至9.3)(中等质量证据)。与载体相比,关于其他单个外用NSAIDs的分析信息过少。很少有试验比较外用NSAIDs与口服NSAIDs,但总体显示疗效相似(低质量证据)。这些疗效结果几乎完全来自膝骨关节炎患者。与载体或口服NSAIDs相比,外用双氯芬酸局部不良事件增加(大多为轻度皮肤反应),但外用酮洛芬未增加(中等质量证据)。全身不良事件(如胃肠道不适)的报告情况较差,但报告的外用NSAIDs与载体之间无差异(极低质量证据)。严重不良事件罕见,外用NSAIDs与载体之间无差异(极低质量证据)。载体治疗的临床成功很常见——在持续6至12周的研究中约一半参与者出现。临床成功与口服安慰剂的直接和间接比较均表明,载体(外用安慰剂)的反应率约为口服安慰剂的两倍。大量已完成但未发表研究的数据无法获取(多达6000名参与者)。据我们所知,其中大部分可能与从未上市的剂型有关。
外用双氯芬酸和外用酮洛芬对少数骨关节炎患者可提供优于载体的良好疼痛缓解效果,但无其他慢性疼痛疾病的相关证据。有新证据表明,在较长时间研究中观察到的至少部分显著安慰剂效应源自NSAIDs载体本身的作用,而NSAIDs在此基础上进一步发挥作用。