Otte Jessica A, Chu Gloria, Heran Benji, Bassett Ken
Educator and researcher for the Therapeutics Initiative, Associate Member of the Division of Palliative Care, and Clinical Associate Professor in the Department of Family Medicine, all in the Faculty of Medicine at the University of British Columbia (UBC) in Vancouver.
Pharmacist and Researcher in the Drug Assessment Working Group of the Therapeutics Initiative at UBC.
Can Fam Physician. 2025 Sep;71(9):574-581. doi: 10.46747/cfp.7109574.
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of tramadol (with or without acetaminophen) in adult pain management compared with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioids, and acetaminophen alone.
Studies were identified through a search of the entire Ovid MEDLINE database, the Ovid MEDLINE Epub Ahead of Print database, Embase, and Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) from 1946 to August 19, 2022.
Included studies comprised double-blind, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of oral tramadol (with or without acetaminophen) compared with opioids, NSAIDs, or acetaminophen for treatment of acute or chronic pain that reported at least 1 of 11 outcomes: total adverse events (AEs), fatal serious AEs (SAEs), nonfatal SAEs, patient withdrawals from the study due to AEs (WDAEs), total study withdrawals, measures of dependence or addiction, quality of life, functional improvement, 30% or more pain reduction, 50% or more pain reduction, and rescue medication use. Overall, 3184 articles were screened and 37 RCTs (21 opioid, 15 NSAID, 1 acetaminophen; N=7156; length 1 hour to 12 weeks) were included. Trials were critically appraised and assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials 1.0. Meta-analyzed outcomes were reported as risk ratios (with 95% confidence intervals [CIs]).
Compared with opioids, tramadol with or without acetaminophen did not significantly differ in efficacy based on 50% or more or 30% or more reduction in pain or in any harm outcomes (nonfatal SAEs [risk ratio (RR)=1.35, 95% CI 0.43 to 4.20]; WDAEs [RR=0.99, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.22]; total withdrawals [RR=0.93, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.11]; or total AEs [RR=0.97, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.05]). Compared with NSAIDs, tramadol with or without acetaminophen was less likely to achieve a 30% or more reduction in pain (RR=0.82, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.90), and was more likely to result in WDAEs (RR=2.86, 95% CI 2.23 to 3.66), total withdrawals (RR=1.68, 95% CI 1.47 to 1.93), and total AEs (RR=1.37, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.47). Evidence was insufficient for meta-analysis of fatal SAEs, drug dependence or addiction, quality of life, functional improvement, or use of rescue medications.
Tramadol with or without acetaminophen did not differ significantly from other opioids, and was less effective and more poorly tolerated than NSAIDs. Short study duration, small sample size, extensive patient exclusion, and inconsistency in outcome reporting limit the scientific validity of conclusions.
评估曲马多(含或不含对乙酰氨基酚)与非甾体抗炎药(NSAIDs)、阿片类药物及单独使用对乙酰氨基酚相比,在成人疼痛管理中的疗效和安全性。
通过检索整个Ovid MEDLINE数据库、Ovid MEDLINE Epub Ahead of Print数据库、Embase和循证医学综述(Cochrane对照试验中央注册库),纳入1946年至2022年8月19日期间的研究。
纳入的研究包括口服曲马多(含或不含对乙酰氨基酚)与阿片类药物、NSAIDs或对乙酰氨基酚治疗急性或慢性疼痛的双盲、随机对照试验(RCTs),这些研究报告了11项结果中的至少1项:总不良事件(AEs)、致命严重不良事件(SAEs)、非致命SAEs、因AEs导致的患者退出研究(WDAEs)、总研究退出、依赖性或成瘾性指标、生活质量、功能改善、疼痛减轻30%或更多、疼痛减轻50%或更多以及使用急救药物。总体而言,筛选了3184篇文章,纳入37项RCTs(21项阿片类药物、15项NSAIDs、1项对乙酰氨基酚;N = 7156;时长1小时至12周)。使用Cochrane随机试验偏倚风险工具1.0对试验进行严格评价和评估。荟萃分析结果以风险比(及95%置信区间[CIs])报告。
与阿片类药物相比,含或不含对乙酰氨基酚的曲马多在疼痛减轻50%或更多或30%或更多方面的疗效,以及在任何不良结局方面(非致命SAEs[风险比(RR)=1.35,95%CI 0.43至4.20];WDAEs[RR = 0.99,95%CI 0.80至1.22];总退出率[RR = 0.93,95%CI 0.78至1.11];或总AEs[RR = 0.97,95%CI 0.89至1.05])均无显著差异。与NSAIDs相比,含或不含对乙酰氨基酚的曲马多疼痛减轻30%或更多的可能性较小(RR = 0.82,95%CI 0.76至0.90),且更有可能导致WDAEs(RR = 2.86,95%CI 2.23至3.66)、总退出率(RR = 1.68,95%CI 1.47至1.93)和总AEs(RR = 1.37,95%CI 1.28至1.47)。关于致命SAEs、药物依赖性或成瘾性、生活质量、功能改善或急救药物使用的荟萃分析证据不足。
含或不含对乙酰氨基酚的曲马多与其他阿片类药物相比无显著差异,且比NSAIDs疗效更差、耐受性更差。研究持续时间短、样本量小、大量患者被排除以及结局报告不一致限制了结论的科学有效性。