Suppr超能文献

治疗慢性盆腔疼痛的药物联合疗法的疗效与安全性:一项系统综述

Efficacy and safety of drug combinations for chronic pelvic pain: a systematic review.

作者信息

Mohiuddin Mohammed, Park Rex, Wesselmann Ursula, Pukall Caroline, Jarvi Keith, Nickel J Curtis, Doiron R Christopher, Halliday Sandra, Gilron Ian

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology & Perioperative Medicine, Queen's University and Kingston Health Sciences Centre, Kingston, ON, Canada.

Departments of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Division of Pain Medicine, and Departments of Neurology and Psychology, The University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.

出版信息

Pain Rep. 2025 Jun 13;10(4):e1299. doi: 10.1097/PR9.0000000000001299. eCollection 2025 Aug.

Abstract

Clinical disorders associated with chronic pelvic pain (CPP) cause demonstrable emotional and physical dysfunction as well as increased health care utilization. Interventions that have been studied for the treatment of CPP often provide inadequate relief and/or intolerable adverse effects. The common practice of combining multiple CPP treatments needs more supportive evidence, and emerging combination trials have been evaluated in this systematic review. We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE and CENTRAL databases for CPP combination trials. This review included double-blind randomized controlled trials comparing combinations of 2 or more agents to at least 1 monotherapy in adults with CPP. The primary outcome was reduction in pain intensity or pain relief, and secondary outcomes included adverse events, quality of life, and other symptoms. Risk of bias was assessed. Nine studies (1,299 participants) were included and involved various different treatments including ciprofloxacin, tamsulosin, pentosan polysulfate, hyaluronic acid, chondroitin, hydroxyzine, troxerutin, carbazochrome, linzagolix, and allopurinol. Studies were heterogenous according to several features including studied treatments, dose and route of administration, and underlying condition such that no studies could be combined for meta-analysis. None of the included studies reported a significant difference in reducing pain intensity for combination therapy vs monotherapy. If future proof-of-concept studies demonstrate that a given combination is superior to all monotherapy components, subsequent large, double-blind randomized, controlled clinical trials of such combinations for CPP are required to better elucidate the role of combination therapy in clinical settings.

摘要

与慢性盆腔疼痛(CPP)相关的临床疾病会导致明显的情绪和身体功能障碍,以及医疗保健利用率的增加。针对CPP治疗所研究的干预措施往往缓解效果不佳和/或产生难以忍受的不良反应。联合多种CPP治疗方法的常见做法需要更多的支持证据,并且在本系统评价中对新出现的联合试验进行了评估。我们在MEDLINE、EMBASE和CENTRAL数据库中检索了CPP联合试验。本评价纳入了双盲随机对照试验,比较了2种或更多药物的联合使用与至少1种单一疗法在成年CPP患者中的疗效。主要结局是疼痛强度降低或疼痛缓解,次要结局包括不良事件、生活质量和其他症状。评估了偏倚风险。纳入了9项研究(1299名参与者),涉及各种不同的治疗方法,包括环丙沙星、坦索罗辛、戊聚糖多硫酸酯、透明质酸、软骨素、羟嗪、曲克芦丁、卡巴克络、林扎戈利克和别嘌醇。根据包括所研究的治疗方法、给药剂量和途径以及潜在病情等几个特征,研究具有异质性,因此没有研究可以合并进行荟萃分析。纳入的研究均未报告联合治疗与单一疗法在降低疼痛强度方面有显著差异。如果未来的概念验证研究表明某一特定联合疗法优于所有单一疗法成分,则需要随后针对CPP进行此类联合疗法的大型、双盲随机对照临床试验,以更好地阐明联合疗法在临床环境中的作用。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3c95/12169960/e75daa3452ad/painreports-10-e1299-g001.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