Suppr超能文献

用于治疗颈神经根性疼痛的全身性类固醇:一项系统评价。

Systemic steroids for cervical radicular pain: A systematic review.

作者信息

Gall Nolan, Ghaffari Cyrus, Koduri Jyotsna, Dove Chris, Levin Joshua

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Division of Pain Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Division of PM&R, Stanford University, Redwood City, CA, USA.

出版信息

Interv Pain Med. 2023 Oct 1;2(4):100280. doi: 10.1016/j.inpm.2023.100280. eCollection 2023 Dec.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Determine the effectiveness of systemic steroids for the treatment of cervical radicular pain.

DATA SOURCES

We identified articles from two electronic databases (PubMed and Ovid Medline) and previously known articles.

STUDY SELECTION

We combined (using the Boolean Operator "AND") the following search terms: "Steroid* and Cervical Radic*" or "Steroid* and Cervicobrachialgia". We applied the search to PubMed and Ovid Medline research databases for all studies up February 11, 2022. We included all published articles involving cervical radicular pain treated with systemic steroids among adult users (≥18 years old). We defined systemic steroids as steroid medication administered into the body excluding epidural or intra-articular injections. We excluded reviews and editorials.

DATA EXTRACTION

Information extracted from each study included: (1) study design; (2) characteristics of trial participants; (3) diagnostic criteria; (4) treatment intervention protocol; (5) outcome measure; and (6) follow-up time. Outcomes included the neck disability index (NDI) and patient reported pain.

DATA SYNTHESIS

842 publications were identified, 7 were suitable for inclusion. The only level one study comparing oral steroid to placebo reported greater improvements of NDI (35.7 ± 21.4 versus 12.9 ± 10.2, P < 0.001) and NPRS (4.4 ± 2.7 versus 1.6 ± 1.2, P < 0.001), and higher success rates (76% [95% CI: 60-92%] vs 30% [95% CI: 14-46%]) in the oral steroid group compared to the placebo group. The only level one study comparing paraspinal intramuscular (IM) versus interlaminar (IL) epidural steroids reported worse outcomes in the IM group with a success rate of 35% [95% CI: 13-58%] at 1 week and 12% [95% CI: 0-27%] at one year in the IM group, compared to 76% [95% CI: 60-92%] at 1 week (p = 0.04) and 68% [95% CI: 50-86%] at one year (p = 0.0004) in the IL group (P < 0.0004). The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and GRADE system was used to assess bias and rate the overall evidence quality.

CONCLUSIONS

Very limited evidence exists supporting treatment of cervical radicular pain with systemic steroids. Oral steroids can be considered as a reasonable conservative option based on one RCT, whereas IM steroids may be inferior to epidural steroids based on another RCT. Additional higher quality studies are needed.

摘要

目的

确定全身用类固醇治疗颈神经根性疼痛的有效性。

数据来源

我们从两个电子数据库(PubMed和Ovid Medline)以及先前已知的文章中筛选出相关文章。

研究选择

我们使用布尔运算符“AND”组合了以下搜索词:“类固醇和颈神经根”或“类固醇*和颈臂痛”。我们将该搜索应用于PubMed和Ovid Medline研究数据库,以查找截至2022年2月11日的所有研究。我们纳入了所有已发表的涉及成年使用者(≥18岁)使用全身用类固醇治疗颈神经根性疼痛的文章。我们将全身用类固醇定义为注入体内的类固醇药物,不包括硬膜外或关节内注射。我们排除了综述和社论。

数据提取

从每项研究中提取的信息包括:(1)研究设计;(2)试验参与者的特征;(3)诊断标准;(4)治疗干预方案;(5)结局指标;以及(6)随访时间。结局包括颈部功能障碍指数(NDI)和患者报告的疼痛。

数据综合

共识别出842篇出版物,其中7篇适合纳入。唯一一项将口服类固醇与安慰剂进行比较的一级研究报告称,口服类固醇组的NDI改善程度更大(35.7±21.4对12.9±10.2,P<0.001),NPRS改善程度更大(4.4±2.7对1.6±1.2,P<0.001),成功率更高(76%[95%CI:60 - 92%]对30%[95%CI:14 - 46%])。唯一一项比较椎旁肌内(IM)与层间(IL)硬膜外类固醇的一级研究报告称,IM组的结局较差,IM组在1周时的成功率为35%[95%CI:13 - 58%],1年时为12%[95%CI:0 - 27%],而IL组在1周时为76%[95%CI:60 - 92%](p = 0.04),1年时为68%[95%CI:50 - 86%](p = 0.0004)(P<0.0004)。使用Cochrane偏倚风险工具和GRADE系统评估偏倚并对总体证据质量进行评级。

结论

支持全身用类固醇治疗颈神经根性疼痛的证据非常有限。基于一项随机对照试验,口服类固醇可被视为一种合理的保守选择,而基于另一项随机对照试验,肌内注射类固醇可能不如硬膜外类固醇。需要更多高质量的研究。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d107/11373080/5fb814bb6fcf/gr1.jpg

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