Efficacy of Pregabalin in the Treatment of Radicular Pain: Results of a Controlled Trial

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness and adverse events of gabapentin and pregabalin for sciatica pain

Aim

This SR aims to assess the effectiveness of pregabalin and gabapentin on pain and disability caused by acute sciatica and the adverse events associated with their clinical use.

Design

Systematic review.

Databases

Electronic databases of Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Clinical Trials.gov were searched from their inception until March 1st of 2021.

Selection criteria

Randomized trials (RCT) with adults > 18 years old with acute sciatica for a minimum of 1 week and a maximum of 1 year (at least moderate pain).

Data treatment

The outcomes were pain, disability and adverse events. Data was summarized using odds ratio and mean difference. GRADE was used to calculate the level of evidence.

Results

Eight RCT involving 747 participants were included. The effect of pregabalin was assessed in 3 RCT and in one three-arm trial (pregabalin vs limaprost vs a combination of limaprost and pregabalin). Two trials assessed the effect of gabapentin compared with placebo and one compared with tramadol. One study assessed the effect of gabapentin vs pregabalin in a crossover head-to-head trial.

A statistically significant improvement on leg pain at 2 weeks and leg pain with movement at 3 and 4 months was found in a RCT comparing gabapentin with placebo. There were no statistically differences on the remaining time periods assessed for leg pain, low back pain and functional disability.

Conclusions

This SR provides clear evidence for lack of effectiveness of pregabalin and gabapentin for sciatica pain management. In view of this, its routine clinical use cannot be supported.

[The optimization of differential diagnosis and treatment of cervical radiculopathy (SHERPA study)]

OBJECTIVE

To improve the algorithm of differential diagnosis and complex treatment of patients with CR.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Forty-two patients with CR were divided into 2 groups. Patients of the first group (n=21) received basic treatment (NSAID, myorelaxants, local injections with glucocorticoids (on demand), B vitamins and non-pharmacological methods) and the anticholinesterase drug ipidacrine. The second group (n=21) had only basic treatment. The total duration of the study was 45 days. The effectiveness of treatment was evaluated with VAS, NDI, GROC and total duration of disability period.

RESULTS

A battery of tests for the diagnosis of CR that included Spurling test, motor strength deficiency, ULTT, pain pattern, shoulder adduction test (diagnostic complex SPASIBO), has been developed. A positive result of all 5 tests guarantees the 94.7% accuracy of CR diagnosis. The application of ipidacrine has allowed a significant (p<0.05) reduction of pain, enhancement of daily living activities and subjective improvement of well-being of patients after 1 month of treatment and mostly after 45 days. Besides, there was a considerable (p<0.05) reduction of the disability period in the first group of patients compared to the control one.

CONCLUSION

The diagnostic complex SPASIBO should be used in diagnosis of CR. It is highly recommended to include ipidacrine in the complex treatment of CR.

Benefits and harms of pregabalin in the management of neuropathic pain: a rapid review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

To assess the benefits and harms of pregabalin in the management of neuropathic pain.

DESIGN

Rapid review and meta-analysis of phase III, randomised, placebo-controlled trials.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults aged 18 years and above with neuropathic pain defined according to the International Association for the Study of Pain criteria.

INTERVENTIONS

Pregabalin or placebo.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Our primary outcomes were pain (as measured using validated scales) and adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were sleep disturbance, quality of life, Patient Global Impression of Change, Clinician Global Impression scale, anxiety and depression scores, overall discontinuations and discontinuations because of adverse events.

RESULTS

We included 28 trials comprising 6087 participants. The neuropathic pain conditions studied were diabetic peripheral neuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia, herpes zoster, sciatica (radicular pain), poststroke pain and spinal cord injury-related pain. Patients who took pregabalin reported significant reductions in pain (numerical rating scale (NRS)) compared with placebo (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.49 (95% CI -0.66 to -0.32, p<0.00001), very low quality evidence). Pregabalin significantly reduced sleep interference scores (NRS) compared with placebo (SMD -0.38 (95% CI -0.50 to -0.26, p<0.00001), moderate quality evidence. Pregabalin significantly increased the risk of adverse events compared with placebo (RR 1.33 (95% CI 1.23 to 1.44, p<0.00001, low quality evidence)). The risks of experiencing weight gain, somnolence, dizziness, peripheral oedema, fatigue, visual disturbances, ataxia, non-peripheral oedema, vertigo and euphoria were significantly increased with pregabalin. Pregabalin was significantly more likely than placebo to lead to discontinuation of the drug because of adverse events (RR 1.91 (95% CI 1.54 to 2.37, p<0.00001), low quality evidence).

CONCLUSION

Pregabalin has beneficial effects on some symptoms of neuropathic pain. However, its use significantly increases the risk of a number of adverse events and discontinuation due to adverse events. The quality of the evidence from journal publications is low.

Alternatives to Opioids in the Pharmacologic Management of Chronic Pain Syndromes: A Narrative Review of Randomized, Controlled, and Blinded Clinical Trials

Chronic pain exerts a tremendous burden on individuals and societies. If one views chronic pain as a single disease entity, then it is the most common and costly medical condition. At present, medical professionals who treat patients in chronic pain are recommended to provide comprehensive and multidisciplinary treatments, which may include pharmacotherapy. Many providers use nonopioid medications to treat chronic pain; however, for some patients, opioid analgesics are the exclusive treatment of chronic pain. However, there is currently an epidemic of opioid use in the United States, and recent guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) have recommended that the use of opioids for nonmalignant chronic pain be used only in certain circumstances. The goal of this review was to report the current body of evidence-based medicine gained from prospective, randomized-controlled, blinded studies on the use of nonopioid analgesics for the most common noncancer chronic pain conditions. A total of 9566 studies were obtained during literature searches, and 271 of these met inclusion for this review. Overall, while many nonopioid analgesics have been found to be effective in reducing pain for many chronic pain conditions, it is evident that the number of high-quality studies is lacking, and the effect sizes noted in many studies are not considered to be clinically significant despite statistical significance. More research is needed to determine effective and mechanism-based treatments for the chronic pain syndromes discussed in this review. Utilization of rigorous and homogeneous research methodology would likely allow for better consistency and reproducibility, which is of utmost importance in guiding evidence-based care.

Is pregabalin effective and safe in total knee arthroplasty? A PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Pain management after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) varies and has been investigated for years. Pregabalin as an anticonvulsant agent that selectively affects the nociceptive process has been used for pain relief after operation. This meta-analysis was conducted to examine the evidence of pregabalin in TKA.

METHODS

Systematic searches of all related literatures were conducted using the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Only randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) for TKA were included. The postoperative narcotic requirements, visual analog scale scores, knee flexion range, and relative risk of incidence rate of adverse effects in the pregabalin group versus placebo group were extracted throughout the study.

RESULTS

Seven placebo-controlled RCTs met the inclusion criteria. The use of pregabalin significantly decrease the postoperative total morphine consumption (P < .05) and increase the passive knee flexion range (P < .05). Compared with the control group, the incidence of some side effects (nausea, vomiting, pruritus, and constipation) was less in the pregabalin group (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

The administration of pregabalin is not only efficacious in the reduction of narcotic requirements and incidence of some adverse effect, but also workable for the improvement of passive knee flexion range after TKA.