The Efficacy and Safety of Botulinum Neurotoxin Type A in Treating Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, Trial Sequential Analysis, and Meta-Regression

IF 3.5 2区医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY European Journal of Pain Pub Date : 2025-02-21 DOI:10.1002/ejp.4796

Waseem Wagrees, Hesham Kelani, Hazem Mohamed Salamah, Abdelrahman Mahmoud, Yehya Khlidj, Mohamed R. Abdelraouf, Bahaa Sharaf, Moustafa Elnewishy, Nadia Albaramony, Ahmed Naeem, Ahmed Abd Elazim, Mohammad El-Ghanem, Diana Greene-Chandos, Mohammad Jadidi, David P. Lerner, Arthur D. Kay, Lisa R. Merlin, Charles Brock

{"title":"The Efficacy and Safety of Botulinum Neurotoxin Type A in Treating Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, Trial Sequential Analysis, and Meta-Regression","authors":"Waseem Wagrees, Hesham Kelani, Hazem Mohamed Salamah, Abdelrahman Mahmoud, Yehya Khlidj, Mohamed R. Abdelraouf, Bahaa Sharaf, Moustafa Elnewishy, Nadia Albaramony, Ahmed Naeem, Ahmed Abd Elazim, Mohammad El-Ghanem, Diana Greene-Chandos, Mohammad Jadidi, David P. Lerner, Arthur D. Kay, Lisa R. Merlin, Charles Brock","doi":"10.1002/ejp.4796","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a leading cause of disability. Botulinum neurotoxin type A (BoNT-A) has strong anti-spasmodic and analgesic effects, suggesting that its local muscular injection can reduce CLBP compared to other therapies. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we investigated the efficacy and safety of BoNT-A on patients with CLBP.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We searched PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases for studies comparing BoNT-A to other therapies in terms of functional improvement and pain improvement as measured by visual analog scale (VAS) and clinically significant improvement in pain (50% or greater reduction in VAS score). We employed trial sequential analysis (TSA) to confirm the findings. The GRADE approach was employed to assess the overall quality of the evidence.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The search yielded nine studies, seven randomised clinical trials (RCTs), and two prospective observational studies. Compared to the control, BoNT-A increased the incidence of clinically significant improvement in pain (RR = 4.82, 95% CI (3.00, 7.76), <i>p</i> < 0.00001) and functional improvement (RR = 3.81, 95% CI (2.40, 6.04), <i>p</i> < 0.00001) (low-certainty evidence), and reduced VAS score (MD = −1.62, 95% CI (−3.13, −0.11), <i>p</i> = 0.04) (very low-certainty evidence). Subgroup analysis showed that BoNT-A is effective against normal saline (moderate-certainty evidence), and it was comparable to steroids and local anaesthetics (very low-certainty evidence). TSA confirmed the findings regarding clinical improvement in pain and functional improvement.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>BoNT-A is a tolerable and effective treatment for CLBP with a longer duration of action. Future high-quality studies are needed to confirm our findings.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Significance</h3>\n \n <p>This paper provides good evidence that BoNT-A may be employed in patients suffering from resistant chronic low back pain not responding to normal saline injection due to its higher efficacy and longer duration of action. Compared to steroids and local anaesthetics injections, there is not enough data to draw a firm conclusion and future studies are needed.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":12021,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Pain","volume":"29 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Pain","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ejp.4796","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a leading cause of disability. Botulinum neurotoxin type A (BoNT-A) has strong anti-spasmodic and analgesic effects, suggesting that its local muscular injection can reduce CLBP compared to other therapies. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we investigated the efficacy and safety of BoNT-A on patients with CLBP.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases for studies comparing BoNT-A to other therapies in terms of functional improvement and pain improvement as measured by visual analog scale (VAS) and clinically significant improvement in pain (50% or greater reduction in VAS score). We employed trial sequential analysis (TSA) to confirm the findings. The GRADE approach was employed to assess the overall quality of the evidence.

Results

The search yielded nine studies, seven randomised clinical trials (RCTs), and two prospective observational studies. Compared to the control, BoNT-A increased the incidence of clinically significant improvement in pain (RR = 4.82, 95% CI (3.00, 7.76), p < 0.00001) and functional improvement (RR = 3.81, 95% CI (2.40, 6.04), p < 0.00001) (low-certainty evidence), and reduced VAS score (MD = −1.62, 95% CI (−3.13, −0.11), p = 0.04) (very low-certainty evidence). Subgroup analysis showed that BoNT-A is effective against normal saline (moderate-certainty evidence), and it was comparable to steroids and local anaesthetics (very low-certainty evidence). TSA confirmed the findings regarding clinical improvement in pain and functional improvement.

Conclusion

BoNT-A is a tolerable and effective treatment for CLBP with a longer duration of action. Future high-quality studies are needed to confirm our findings.

Significance

This paper provides good evidence that BoNT-A may be employed in patients suffering from resistant chronic low back pain not responding to normal saline injection due to its higher efficacy and longer duration of action. Compared to steroids and local anaesthetics injections, there is not enough data to draw a firm conclusion and future studies are needed.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

European Journal of Pain 医学-临床神经学

CiteScore

7.50

自引率

5.60%

发文量

163

审稿时长

4-8 weeks

期刊介绍： European Journal of Pain (EJP) publishes clinical and basic science research papers relevant to all aspects of pain and its management, including specialties such as anaesthesia, dentistry, neurology and neurosurgery, orthopaedics, palliative care, pharmacology, physiology, psychiatry, psychology and rehabilitation; socio-economic aspects of pain are also covered. Regular sections in the journal are as follows: • Editorials and Commentaries • Position Papers and Guidelines • Reviews • Original Articles • Letters • Bookshelf The journal particularly welcomes clinical trials, which are published on an occasional basis. Research articles are published under the following subject headings: • Neurobiology • Neurology • Experimental Pharmacology • Clinical Pharmacology • Psychology • Behavioural Therapy • Epidemiology • Cancer Pain • Acute Pain • Clinical Trials.