Department of Pharmacology, GMC, Amritsar, Punjab, India.
Department of Medicine, GMC, Amritsar, Punjab, India.
Indian J Pharmacol. 2021 Sep-Oct;53(5):358-363. doi: 10.4103/ijp.ijp_1159_20.
Diabetic neuropathy affects 10.5%-32.2% of diabetic population posing clinical burden onto society.
We aimed to study the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of methylcobalamin, methylcobalamin plus pregabalin, and methylcobalamin plus duloxetine in patients of painful diabetic neuropathy.
It is a prospective, randomized, open-label, interventional, and parallel-group study done in patients of painful diabetic neuropathy.
A total of 100 patients were recruited and randomized to three study groups A, B, and C on methylcobalamin, methylcobalamin and pregabalin, and methylcobalamin and duloxetine, respectively. Patients were assessed at day 0 and 4, 8, and 12 weeks. The tuning fork test, monofilament test, Thermal Sensitivity testing, and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) were used to analyze vibration, pressure, thermal sensitivity, and pain.
The results are expressed as mean ± standard deviation. Appropriate statistical methods were used to calculate P value (<0.05 - significant).
The increase in number of patients with vibration perception is 11.6%, 37.9%, and 41.4%; pressure sensation is 7.6%, 37.9%, and 37.9%; and thermal sensitivity is 15.4%, 31.1%, and 37.9% in Groups A, B, and C, respectively. The decrease in VAS scores is 0.58 ± 0.14, 3.82 ± 0.05, and 4.17 ± 0.48 in Groups A, B, and C correspondingly. The adverse effects reported in Groups A, B, and C are 0%, 6.9%, and 10.3%, respectively.
Group C is more efficacious when compared to Groups A and B while Group B is safer.
糖尿病周围神经病变影响 10.5%-32.2%的糖尿病患者,给社会带来了临床负担。
本研究旨在研究甲钴胺、甲钴胺联合普瑞巴林和甲钴胺联合度洛西汀治疗痛性糖尿病周围神经病变患者的疗效、安全性和耐受性。
这是一项在痛性糖尿病周围神经病变患者中进行的前瞻性、随机、开放标签、干预性和平行组研究。
共招募了 100 例患者,并随机分为三组,分别接受甲钴胺、甲钴胺联合普瑞巴林和甲钴胺联合度洛西汀治疗。患者在第 0 天和第 4、8 和 12 周进行评估。使用音叉试验、单丝试验、热敏试验和视觉模拟评分(VAS)来分析振动、压力、热敏和疼痛。
结果表示为均值±标准差。使用适当的统计方法计算 P 值(<0.05-有意义)。
振动感知患者数量增加分别为 11.6%、37.9%和 41.4%;压力感知患者数量增加分别为 7.6%、37.9%和 37.9%;热敏感知患者数量增加分别为 15.4%、31.1%和 37.9%;VAS 评分降低分别为 0.58±0.14、3.82±0.05 和 4.17±0.48。各组不良反应发生率分别为 0%、6.9%和 10.3%。
与 A 组和 B 组相比,C 组更有效,而 B 组更安全。