Comparing the effectiveness of pregabalin and gabapentin in patients with lumbar radiculopathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY Pain Practice Pub Date : 2024-10-11 DOI:10.1111/papr.13424
Do Yun Kwon, Kwang-Ryeol Kim, Dong Hyuck Kim, Sang Gyu Kwak
{"title":"Comparing the effectiveness of pregabalin and gabapentin in patients with lumbar radiculopathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Do Yun Kwon, Kwang-Ryeol Kim, Dong Hyuck Kim, Sang Gyu Kwak","doi":"10.1111/papr.13424","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Gabapentinoids are commonly prescribed to control neuropathic pain of lumbar radiculopathy. Few trials have compared the efficacy of gabapentin (GBP) and pregabalin (PGB). Therefore, the authors conducted a meta-analysis to compare the difference in effect between GBP and PGB in lumbar radiculopathy patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Articles which were published between January 1, 1960 and May 31, 2023 were investigated via Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, Google Scholar, and MEDLINE. This meta-analysis was conducted on patients with lumbar radiculopathy. Gabapentin was used as an intervention, and pregabalin as a comparison. As outcomes, pain rating scales including visual analog scale (VAS) and numeric pain rating scale (NRS), and number of adverse events (dizziness and sedation) were obtained.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>PGB showed statistically significant improvement in pain scale (VAS and NRS) in short-term follow-up (6 weeks or less) compared to GBP. (Total mean difference of -0.31) However, in the long-term follow-up (6 weeks to 12 weeks), there was no difference in pain reduction effect between two groups. The incidence of AEs showed no difference between two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Based on this article, the existing evidence suggests that PGB was more effective in reducing pain of lumbar radiculopathy compared to GBP at the short-term follow-up, but there was no difference in the long-term follow-up. Physicians should consider this finding in prescribing medications for patients with lumbar radiculopathy.</p>","PeriodicalId":19974,"journal":{"name":"Pain Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11683178/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/papr.13424","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Gabapentinoids are commonly prescribed to control neuropathic pain of lumbar radiculopathy. Few trials have compared the efficacy of gabapentin (GBP) and pregabalin (PGB). Therefore, the authors conducted a meta-analysis to compare the difference in effect between GBP and PGB in lumbar radiculopathy patients.

Methods: Articles which were published between January 1, 1960 and May 31, 2023 were investigated via Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, Google Scholar, and MEDLINE. This meta-analysis was conducted on patients with lumbar radiculopathy. Gabapentin was used as an intervention, and pregabalin as a comparison. As outcomes, pain rating scales including visual analog scale (VAS) and numeric pain rating scale (NRS), and number of adverse events (dizziness and sedation) were obtained.

Results: PGB showed statistically significant improvement in pain scale (VAS and NRS) in short-term follow-up (6 weeks or less) compared to GBP. (Total mean difference of -0.31) However, in the long-term follow-up (6 weeks to 12 weeks), there was no difference in pain reduction effect between two groups. The incidence of AEs showed no difference between two groups.

Conclusion: Based on this article, the existing evidence suggests that PGB was more effective in reducing pain of lumbar radiculopathy compared to GBP at the short-term follow-up, but there was no difference in the long-term follow-up. Physicians should consider this finding in prescribing medications for patients with lumbar radiculopathy.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
比较普瑞巴林和加巴喷丁对腰椎病患者的疗效:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:加巴喷丁类药物通常用于控制腰椎病的神经性疼痛。很少有试验比较加巴喷丁(GBP)和普瑞巴林(PGB)的疗效。因此,作者进行了一项荟萃分析,以比较GBP和PGB在腰椎病患者中的疗效差异:通过 Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials、Embase、Google Scholar 和 MEDLINE 调查了 1960 年 1 月 1 日至 2023 年 5 月 31 日期间发表的文章。这项荟萃分析针对的是腰椎病患者。加巴喷丁作为干预药物,普瑞巴林作为对比药物。结果显示,包括视觉模拟量表(VAS)和数字疼痛评分量表(NRS)在内的疼痛评分量表以及不良反应(头晕和镇静)的数量均有所改善:与 GBP 相比,PGB 在短期随访(6 周或更短)中对疼痛评分表(VAS 和 NRS)的改善具有统计学意义。(但在长期随访(6 周至 12 周)中,两组在减轻疼痛效果方面没有差异。结论:根据这篇文章,现有证据表明,在短期随访中,PGB 比 GBP 更能有效减轻腰椎间盘突出症的疼痛,但在长期随访中并无差异。医生在为腰椎病患者开药时应考虑这一结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Pain Practice
Pain Practice ANESTHESIOLOGY-CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
3.80%
发文量
92
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Pain Practice, the official journal of the World Institute of Pain, publishes international multidisciplinary articles on pain and analgesia that provide its readership with up-to-date research, evaluation methods, and techniques for pain management. Special sections including the Consultant’s Corner, Images in Pain Practice, Case Studies from Mayo, Tutorials, and the Evidence-Based Medicine combine to give pain researchers, pain clinicians and pain fellows in training a systematic approach to continuing education in pain medicine. Prior to publication, all articles and reviews undergo peer review by at least two experts in the field.
期刊最新文献
The Implementation of Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome (PSPS): Mechanism-Based Recommendations. Minimally Invasive, Micro-Autologous Fat Transfer for Secondary Occipital Neuralgia. The Effects of Psychological Treatments for Chronic Pain on Reducing Opioid Use in People at Risk for Opioid Misuse: A Randomized Feasibility Trial. Comment on "Twenty-One-Year Experience With Cervical Diagnostic Blocks and Denervation: A Study of 1031 Cases at A Single Institution". Toward a Finer-Grained Understanding of Greater-Occipital-Nerve Block Duration in Migraine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1