神经妥乐平治疗神经源性疼痛有效性的系统评价(英文)

摘要

目的:根据目前的临床研究证据,评价神经妥乐平用于治疗神经源性疼痛的疗效和安全性.方法:检索MEDLINE,荷兰医学文摘(EMBASE),Cochrane临床对照试验资料库(Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials),中国生物医学文摘(CBM)和中国期刊全文数据库(CNKI)等生物医学文献数据库,收集神经妥乐平治疗神经源性疼痛的临床对照研究,特别是随机对照研究(RCTs).评价指标为疗效、生活质量、治疗费用和不良反应.用Jadad评分对临床研究质量进行评价,用Revman软件进行meta分析.结果:共纳入26项研究,其中24项Jadad评分小于3,属低质量研究.未检索到评价神经妥乐平对生活质量影响和治疗费用的研究.对11项研究进行meta分析表明,神经妥乐平对神经源性疼痛疗效优于安慰剂或空白对照,比值比(OR)为3.84[2.68,5.50].6项对照研究的合并效应表明,和安慰剂或空白对照相比,神经妥乐平可有效降低疼痛的视觉模拟评分,权重均数差值(WMD)为-1.76[-2.31,-1.21].对以卡马西平、甲钴胺、维生素B12和非甾体抗炎药(NSAIDs)等药物为对照的研究进行综合分析也表明,神经妥乐平的疗效优于上述药物.在安全性方面,神经妥乐平的不良反应发生率不高于安慰剂、卡马西平或NSAIDs,危险度差值为-0.01[-0.04,0.02].结论:神经妥乐平治疗神经源性疼痛可能是安全有效的.但目前的临床研究质量较低,降低了meta分析的论证强度.应进行大规模、高质量的随机对照研究为神经妥乐平的应用提供证据.%AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of neurotropin in the treatment of neuropathic pain.METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in biomedical database including MEDLINE,EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CBM and CNKI. All studies focused on the clinical controlled trials, especially randomized controlled trials (RCTs) . The outcome measures included efficacy,life quality, cost of the treatment and adverse reactions. Quality assessments of clinical trials were evaluated with Jadad Score. Meta-analysis of included studies was performed with Revman software. RESULTS: Twenty-six clinical trials were included. Jadad Score of 24 trials was less than 3, which indicated the poor quality of the trials. None of the clinical trials evaluated the changes in life quality and cost related to neurotropin treatment.Meta analysis of 11 trials indicated neurotropin was more effective than placebo or blank, and the odds ratio of efficacy was 3.84 [2.68, 5.50] . The combining effect of 6 RCTs showed that neurotropin decreased the pain scores measured by Visual Analog Scale significantly compared with placebo or blank, the weighted mean difference (WMD) was -1.76 [-2.31, -1.21] . The pooled effects of the trials comparing neurotropin with other pain relieving drugs such as earbamazepine or NSAIDs also showed positive effect favored neurotropin.Neurotropin had no more adverse reactions than placebo, carbamazepine or NSAIDs, and the pooled risk difference was -0.01 [-0.04, 0.02] . CONCLUSION: According to present evidence, neurotropin may be effective and safe in the treatment of neuropathic pain. However, the poor quality of the studies decreases the persuasion of the results. Large-scale and well-designed RCTs with enough follow-ups should be carried out to provide further evidence for the use of neurotropin in neuropathie pain.