Adams Kathleen K, Waters Kristin, Sobieraj Diana M
University of Connecticut School of Pharmacy, 69 N. Eagleville Rd. Unit 3092, Storrs, CT, 06269, USA.
Addict Sci Clin Pract. 2025 Feb 20;20(1):19. doi: 10.1186/s13722-025-00548-z.
Withdrawal prior to buprenorphine initiation may be intolerable or create barriers to therapy. We aim to update our previous systematic review on the efficacy and safety of buprenorphine initiation strategies that aim to omit prerequisite opioid withdrawal (POW).
We used the same search strategy for this update as in the original review with the modification of an additional term "low dose." We searched Embase and Scopus from April 11, 2020 to August 1, 2024 with searches in Google Scholar and www.
gov . A study was included if it described patients with opioid use disorder or chronic pain that transitioned from a full mu-opioid agonist to buprenorphine without preceding withdrawal and reported withdrawal during initiation as an outcome. Two investigators independently screened citations and articles for inclusion, collected data using a standardized data collection tool, and assessed study risk of bias.
Forty-four articles met our inclusion criteria; 31 were case reports/series reporting 84 cases and 13 were single-arm observational studies reporting a total of 576 cases. These studies were added to the literature from our original systematic review, totaling 59 studies and 682 patients. Sublingual buprenorphine was the most common initial formulation, comprising 55% (376/682) of cases. In case reports/series, use of a validated scale to measure withdrawal was uncommon; validated scales were only used in 36% of patients. All other patients had withdrawal assessed in a manner not utilizing a validated scale. Approximately half of these patients experienced any level of withdrawal (57/106 = 54%). The specific outcome of "any level of withdrawal" was not consistently reported in single-arm observational studies. Eight studies reported on any level of withdrawal, which occurred in 41% (177/428) of initiation attempts; some patients experienced more than one initiation attempt. Thirteen patients in case reports/series and 37 patients in the single-arm observational studies reported clinically significant withdrawal (50/682 = 7%). 81% (451/555) of patients transitioned to buprenorphine.
The prevalence of buprenorphine dosing strategies that aim to omit POW has vastly increased over the past 4 years. While quality of evidence remains low, the increased quantity of publications and integration into health-system guidelines and protocols demonstrates the need for prospective, controlled studies. It is unknown how selection bias impacts current findings, further highlighting the need for prospective, randomized, controlled trials evaluating these dosing strategies.
在开始使用丁丙诺啡之前停药可能难以耐受或给治疗带来障碍。我们旨在更新之前关于旨在省略必要阿片类药物戒断(POW)的丁丙诺啡起始策略的疗效和安全性的系统评价。
本次更新使用了与原始评价相同的检索策略,并增加了一个检索词“低剂量”。我们于2020年4月11日至2024年8月1日在Embase和Scopus数据库进行检索,并在谷歌学术和ClinicalTrials.gov网站进行补充检索。如果一项研究描述了从完全μ阿片受体激动剂转换为丁丙诺啡且无前驱戒断的阿片类药物使用障碍或慢性疼痛患者,并将起始过程中的戒断作为一项结局进行报告,则纳入该研究。两名研究者独立筛选纳入的文献和文章,使用标准化数据收集工具收集数据,并评估研究的偏倚风险。
44篇文章符合我们的纳入标准;31篇为病例报告/系列,报告了84例病例,13篇为单臂观察性研究,共报告了576例病例。这些研究被添加到我们原始系统评价的文献中,总计59项研究和682例患者。舌下含服丁丙诺啡是最常见的初始剂型,占病例的55%(376/682)。在病例报告/系列中,使用经过验证的量表来测量戒断并不常见;仅36%的患者使用了经过验证的量表。所有其他患者的戒断评估方式未使用经过验证的量表。这些患者中约一半经历了任何程度的戒断(57/106 = 54%)。单臂观察性研究中未一致报告“任何程度的戒断”这一具体结局。8项研究报告了任何程度的戒断,在41%(177/428)的起始尝试中发生;一些患者经历了不止一次起始尝试。病例报告/系列中的13例患者和单臂观察性研究中的37例患者报告了具有临床意义的戒断(50/682 = 7%)。81%(451/555)的患者转换为丁丙诺啡。
旨在省略POW的丁丙诺啡给药策略的应用率在过去4年中大幅增加。虽然证据质量仍然较低,但出版物数量的增加以及纳入卫生系统指南和方案表明需要进行前瞻性对照研究。尚不清楚选择偏倚如何影响当前研究结果,这进一步凸显了需要进行前瞻性随机对照试验来评估这些给药策略。