Fabritius Maria Louise, Wetterslev Jørn, Mathiesen Ole, Dahl Jørgen B
Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospitals, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Copenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
J Pain Res. 2017 Nov 1;10:2547-2563. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S138519. eCollection 2017.
During the last 15 years, gabapentin has become an established component of postoperative pain treatment. Gabapentin has been employed in a wide range of doses, but little is known about the optimal dose, providing the best balance between benefit and harm. This systematic review with meta-analyses aimed to explore the beneficial and harmful effects of various doses of gabapentin administered to surgical patients.
Data in this paper were derived from an original review, and the subgroup analyses were predefined in an International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews published protocol: PROSPERO (ID: CRD42013006538). The methods followed Cochrane guidelines. The Cochrane Library's CENTRAL, PubMed, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, Google Scholar, and FDA database were searched for relevant trials. Randomized clinical trials comparing gabapentin versus placebo were included. Four different dose intervals were investigated: 0-350, 351-700, 701-1050, and >1050 mg. Primary co-outcomes were 24-hour morphine consumption and serious adverse events (SAEs), with emphasis put on trials with low risk of bias.
One hundred and twenty-two randomized clinical trials, with 8466 patients, were included. Sixteen were overall low risk of bias. No consistent increase in morphine-sparing effect was observed with increasing doses of gabapentin from the trials with low risk of bias. Analyzing all trials, the smallest and the highest dose subgroups demonstrated numerically the most prominent reduction in morphine consumption. Twenty-seven trials reported 72 SAEs, of which 83% were reported in the >1050 mg subgroup. No systematic increase in SAEs was observed with increasing doses of gabapentin.
Data were sparse, and the small number of trials with low risk of bias is a major limitation for firm conclusions. Taking these limitations into account, we were not able to demonstrate a clear relationship between the dosage of gabapentin and opioid-sparing or harmful effects. These subgroup analyses are exploratory and hypothesis-generating for future trialists.
在过去15年中,加巴喷丁已成为术后疼痛治疗的既定组成部分。加巴喷丁已被用于多种剂量,但对于能在获益与危害之间提供最佳平衡的最佳剂量却知之甚少。这项带有荟萃分析的系统评价旨在探讨给予手术患者不同剂量加巴喷丁的有益和有害影响。
本文数据源自一项原始评价,亚组分析在国际前瞻性系统评价注册库(PROSPERO,ID:CRD42013006538)发布的方案中预先确定。方法遵循Cochrane指南。检索了Cochrane图书馆的CENTRAL、PubMed、EMBASE、科学引文索引扩展版、谷歌学术和FDA数据库以查找相关试验。纳入比较加巴喷丁与安慰剂的随机临床试验。研究了四个不同的剂量区间:0 - 350、351 - 700、701 - 1050和>1050 mg。主要共同结局为24小时吗啡消耗量和严重不良事件(SAEs),重点关注偏倚风险低的试验。
纳入了122项随机临床试验,共8466例患者。其中16项总体偏倚风险低。在偏倚风险低的试验中,未观察到随着加巴喷丁剂量增加吗啡节省效应持续增加。分析所有试验,最小剂量亚组和最大剂量亚组在数值上显示出吗啡消耗量减少最为显著。27项试验报告了72例严重不良事件,其中83%报告于>1050 mg亚组。未观察到随着加巴喷丁剂量增加严重不良事件有系统性增加。
数据稀少,且偏倚风险低的试验数量少是得出确凿结论的主要限制因素。考虑到这些局限性,我们无法证明加巴喷丁剂量与阿片类药物节省或有害效应之间存在明确关系。这些亚组分析具有探索性,可为未来的试验者提供假设。