-
Sports Medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) May 2022Peripheral neuropathies are a prevalent, heterogeneous group of diseases of the peripheral nervous system. Symptoms are often debilitating, difficult to treat, and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Peripheral neuropathies are a prevalent, heterogeneous group of diseases of the peripheral nervous system. Symptoms are often debilitating, difficult to treat, and usually become chronic. Not only do they diminish patients' quality of life, but they can also affect medical therapy and lead to complications. To date, for most conditions there are no evidence-based causal treatment options available. Research has increased considerably since the last review in 2014 regarding the therapeutic potential of exercise interventions for patients with polyneuropathy.
OBJECTIVE
Our objective in this systematic review with meta-analysis was to analyze exercise interventions for neuropathic patients in order to update a systematic review from 2014 and to evaluate the potential benefits of exercise on neuropathies of different origin that can then be translated into practice.
METHODS
Two independent reviewers performed a systematic review with meta-analysis according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Inclusion criteria according to the PICOS approach were: neuropathic patients, exercise interventions only, an inactive or non-exercising control group, and solely randomized controlled trials with the following outcome parameters: neuropathic symptoms, balance parameters, functional mobility, gait, health-related quality of life, and HbA1c (glycated hemoglobin).
RESULTS
A total of 41 randomized, controlled trials met all inclusion criteria, 20 of which could be included in the quantitative analysis. Study quality varied from moderate to high. Current data further support the hypothesis that exercise is beneficial for neuropathic patients. This is best documented for patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) (27 studies) as well as for chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) (nine studies), while there are only few studies (five) on all other causes of neuropathy. We found standardized mean differences in favor of the exercise group of 0.27-2.00 for static balance, Berg Balance Scale, Timed-up-and-go-test, nerve conduction velocity of peroneal and sural nerve as well as for HbA1c in patients with DPN, and standardized mean differences of 0.43-0.75 for static balance, quality of life, and neuropathy-induced symptoms in patients with CIPN.
CONCLUSION
For DPN, evidence-based recommendations can now be made, suggesting a combination of endurance and sensorimotor training to be most beneficial. For patients with CIPN, sensorimotor training remains the most crucial component. For all other neuropathies, more high-quality research is needed to derive evidence-based recommendations. Overall, it seems that sensorimotor training has great potential to target most neuropathies and combined with endurance training is therefore currently the best treatment option for neuropathies.
REGISTRATION NUMBER
(PROSPERO 2019 CRD42019124583)/16.04.2019.
Topics: Humans; Diabetic Neuropathies; Exercise; Exercise Therapy; Glycated Hemoglobin; Quality of Life
PubMed: 34964950
DOI: 10.1007/s40279-021-01596-6 -
Annals of Medicine Mar 2017Diabetic foot is a severe public health issue, yet rare studies investigated its global epidemiology. Here we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis through... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Diabetic foot is a severe public health issue, yet rare studies investigated its global epidemiology. Here we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis through searching PubMed, EMBASE, ISI Web of science, and Cochrane database. We found that that global diabetic foot ulcer prevalence was 6.3% (95%CI: 5.4-7.3%), which was higher in males (4.5%, 95%CI: 3.7-5.2%) than in females (3.5%, 95%CI: 2.8-4.2%), and higher in type 2 diabetic patients (6.4%, 95%CI: 4.6-8.1%) than in type 1 diabetics (5.5%, 95%CI: 3.2-7.7%). North America had the highest prevalence (13.0%, 95%CI: 10.0-15.9%), Oceania had the lowest (3.0%, 95% CI: 0.9-5.0%), and the prevalence in Asia, Europe, and Africa were 5.5% (95%CI: 4.6-6.4%), 5.1% (95%CI: 4.1-6.0%), and 7.2% (95%CI: 5.1-9.3%), respectively. Australia has the lowest (1.5%, 95%CI: 0.7-2.4%) and Belgium has the highest prevalence (16.6%, 95%CI: 10.7-22.4%), followed by Canada (14.8%, 95%CI: 9.4-20.1%) and USA (13.0%, 95%CI: 8.3-17.7%). The patients with diabetic foot ulcer were older, had a lower body mass index, longer diabetic duration, and had more hypertension, diabetic retinopathy, and smoking history than patients without diabetic foot ulceration. Our results provide suggestions for policy makers in deciding preventing strategy of diabetic foot ulceration in the future. Key messages Global prevalence of diabetic foot is 6.3% (95%CI: 5.4-7.3%), and the prevalence in North America, Asia, Europe, Africa and Oceania was 13.0% (95%CI: 10.0-15.9%), 5.5% (95%CI: 4.6-6.4%), 5.1% (95%CI: 4.1-6.0%), 7.2% (95%CI: 5.1-9.3%), and 3.0% (95% CI: 0.9-5.0%). Diabetic foot was more prevalent in males than in females, and more prevalent in type 2 diabetic foot patients than in type 1 diabetic foot patients. The patients with diabetic foot were older, had a lower body mass index, longer diabetic duration, and had more hypertension, diabetic retinopathy, and smoking history than patients without diabetic foot.
Topics: Adult; Africa; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Asia; Australia; Body Mass Index; Decision Making; Diabetes Complications; Diabetic Foot; Diabetic Retinopathy; Europe; Female; Foot Ulcer; Humans; Hypertension; Male; Middle Aged; North America; Prevalence; Risk Factors; Smoking
PubMed: 27585063
DOI: 10.1080/07853890.2016.1231932 -
Current Pain and Headache Reports Aug 2022Painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN) manifests with pain typically in the distal lower extremities and can be challenging to treat. The authors appraised the literature for... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
Painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN) manifests with pain typically in the distal lower extremities and can be challenging to treat. The authors appraised the literature for evidence on conservative, pharmacological, and neuromodulation treatment options for PDN.
RECENT FINDINGS
Intensive glycemic control with insulin in patients with type 1 diabetes may be associated with lower odds of distal symmetric polyneuropathy compared to patients who receive conventional insulin therapy. First-line pharmacologic therapy for PDN includes gabapentinoids (pregabalin and gabapentin) and duloxetine. Additional pharmacologic modalities that are approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) but are considered second-line agents include tapentadol and 8% capsaicin patch, although studies have revealed modest treatment effects from these modalities. There is level I evidence on the use of dorsal column spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for treatment of PDN, delivering either a 10-kHz waveform or tonic waveform. In summary, this review provides an overview of treatment options for PDN. Furthermore, it provides updates on the level of evidence for SCS therapy in cases of PDN refractory to conventional medical therapy.
Topics: Diabetes Mellitus; Diabetic Neuropathies; Gabapentin; Humans; Insulins; Pregabalin; Spinal Cord Stimulation
PubMed: 35716275
DOI: 10.1007/s11916-022-01061-7 -
Medicine Aug 2019Diabetic foot complications are the main reason for hospitalization and amputation in people with diabetes and have a prevalence of up to 25%. Clinical practice...
AIM
Diabetic foot complications are the main reason for hospitalization and amputation in people with diabetes and have a prevalence of up to 25%. Clinical practice guidelines are recommendations based on evidence with the aim of improving health care. The main aim of this study was to carry out a systematic review of the levels of the evaluation and treatment strategies that appear in the clinical practice guidelines focus on diabetic foot or diabetes with diabetic foot section. Another objective of this study was to perform an analysis of the levels of evidence in support of the recommendations made by the selected clinical practice guidelines.
METHODS
A systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) and a quality assessment by the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) were performed. The databases checked were "NICE", "Cinahl", "Health Guide", "RNAO", "Sign", "PubMed", "Scopus" and "NCG". The search terms included were "diabetic foot", "guideline(s)", "practice guideline(s)" and "diabetes."
RESULTS
Twelve articles were selected after checked inclusion criteria and quality assessment. A summary and classification of the recommendations was completed.
CONCLUSIONS
The heterogeneity of levels of evidence and grades of recommendation of the CPGs included regarding the management, approach and treatment of DF makes it difficult to interpret and assume them in clinical practice in order to select the most correct procedures. Despite this and according to the detailed study of the guidelines included in this work, it can be concluded that the highly recommendable interventions for DF management are debridement (very high level of evidence and strongly recommended), foot evaluation (moderate level of evidence and fairly recommended) and therapeutic footwear (moderate level of evidence and fairly recommended).
Topics: Diabetic Foot; Disease Management; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Prevalence
PubMed: 31464916
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000016877 -
Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice May 2018Diabetic foot is one of the most common complications of diabetes. It has the potential risk of pathologic consequences including infection, ulceration and amputation,... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Diabetic foot is one of the most common complications of diabetes. It has the potential risk of pathologic consequences including infection, ulceration and amputation, but a growing body of evidence suggests that physical activity and exercise may improve diabetic foot outcomes.
OBJECTIVE
To analyze de effects of exercise and physical activity interventions on diabetic foot outcomes.
METHODS
A comprehensive and systematic search was conducted according to PRISMA recommendations. Only controlled clinical trials with patients with diabetes were included.
RESULTS
Six studies, involving 418 patients with diabetes, were included. Two studies used only aerobic exercise; two studies combined aerobic, resistance and balance exercise; and two studies combined aerobic and balance exercise by Thai Chin Chuan methods. Physical activity and exercise significantly improved nerve velocity conduction, peripheral sensory function and foot peak pressure distribution. Moreover, the ulcers incidence rate per year was lower in the intervention groups, compared with the controls [0.02 vs. 0.12].
CONCLUSION
This review suggests evidence that physical activity and exercise is an effective non-pharmacological intervention to improve diabetic foot related outcomes. Combined multi-disciplinary treatments are more effective in the prevention of foot complications in patients with diabetes.
Topics: Amputation, Surgical; Diabetic Foot; Exercise; Exercise Therapy; Humans; Prognosis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 29477503
DOI: 10.1016/j.diabres.2018.02.020 -
Journal of Alternative and... Mar 2017Neuropathy and its associated pain pose great therapeutic challenges. While there has been a recent surge in acupuncture use and research, little remains known about its... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
Neuropathy and its associated pain pose great therapeutic challenges. While there has been a recent surge in acupuncture use and research, little remains known about its effects on nerve function. This review aims to assess the efficacy of acupuncture in the treatment of neuropathy of various etiologies.
METHODS
The Medline, AMED, Cochrane, Scopus, CINAHL, and clintrials.gov databases were systematically searched from inception to July 2015. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing acupuncture's efficacy for poly- and mononeuropathy were reviewed. Parallel and crossover RCTs focused on acupuncture's efficacy were reviewed and screened for eligibility. The Scale for Assessing Scientific Quality of Investigations in Complementary and Alternative Medicine was used to assess RCT quality. RCTs with score of >9 and active control treatments such as sham acupuncture or medical therapy were included.
RESULTS
Fifteen studies were included: 13 original RCTs, a long-term follow-up, and a re-analysis of a prior RCT. The selected RCTs studied acupuncture for neuropathy caused by diabetes, Bell's palsy, carpal tunnel syndrome, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), and idiopathic conditions. Acupuncture regimens, control conditions, and outcome measures differed among studies, and various methodological issues were identified. Still, the majority of RCTs showed benefit for acupuncture over control in the treatment of diabetic neuropathy, Bell's palsy, and carpal tunnel syndrome. Acupuncture is probably effective in the treatment of HIV-related neuropathy, and there is insufficient evidence for its benefits in idiopathic neuropathy. Acupuncture appears to improve nerve conduction study parameters in both sensory and motor nerves. Meta-analyses were conducted on all diabetic neuropathy and Bell's palsy individual subject data (six RCTs; a total of 680 subjects) using a summary estimate random effects model, which showed combined odds ratio of 4.23 (95% confidence interval 2.3-7.8; p < 0.001) favoring acupuncture over control for neuropathic symptoms.
CONCLUSIONS
Acupuncture is beneficial in some peripheral neuropathies, but more rigorously designed studies using sham-acupuncture control are needed to characterize its effect and optimal use better.
Topics: Acupuncture Therapy; Humans; Integrative Medicine; Peripheral Nervous System Diseases; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 28112552
DOI: 10.1089/acm.2016.0155 -
Diabetes/metabolism Research and Reviews Jan 2016Prevention of foot ulcers in patients with diabetes is extremely important to help reduce the enormous burden of foot ulceration on both patient and health resources. A... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Prevention of foot ulcers in patients with diabetes is extremely important to help reduce the enormous burden of foot ulceration on both patient and health resources. A comprehensive analysis of reported interventions is not currently available, but is needed to better inform caregivers about effective prevention. The aim of this systematic review is to investigate the effectiveness of interventions to prevent first and recurrent foot ulcers in persons with diabetes who are at risk for ulceration.
METHODS
The available medical scientific literature in PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane database was searched for original research studies on preventative interventions. Both controlled and non-controlled studies were selected. Data from controlled studies were assessed for methodological quality by two independent reviewers.
RESULTS
From the identified records, a total of 30 controlled studies (of which 19 RCTs) and another 44 non-controlled studies were assessed and described. Few controlled studies, of generally low to moderate quality, were identified on the prevention of a first foot ulcer. For the prevention of recurrent plantar foot ulcers, multiple RCTs with low risk of bias show the benefit for the use of daily foot skin temperature measurements and consequent preventative actions, as well as for therapeutic footwear that demonstrates to relieve plantar pressure and that is worn by the patient. To prevent recurrence, some evidence exists for integrated foot care when it includes a combination of professional foot treatment, therapeutic footwear and patient education; for just a single session of patient education, no evidence exists. Surgical interventions can be effective in selected patients, but the evidence base is small.
CONCLUSION
The evidence base to support the use of specific self-management and footwear interventions for the prevention of recurrent plantar foot ulcers is quite strong, but is small for the use of other, sometimes widely applied, interventions and is practically nonexistent for the prevention of a first foot ulcer and non-plantar foot ulcer.
Topics: Combined Modality Therapy; Cost of Illness; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Foot; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Patient Compliance; Patient Education as Topic; Precision Medicine; Recurrence; Risk Factors; Self Care; Shoes
PubMed: 26340966
DOI: 10.1002/dmrr.2701 -
Diabetologia Feb 2021Few studies examine the association between age at diagnosis and subsequent complications from type 2 diabetes. This paper aims to summarise the risk of mortality,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIMS/HYPOTHESIS
Few studies examine the association between age at diagnosis and subsequent complications from type 2 diabetes. This paper aims to summarise the risk of mortality, macrovascular complications and microvascular complications associated with age at diagnosis of type 2 diabetes.
METHODS
Data were sourced from MEDLINE and All EBM (Evidence Based Medicine) databases from inception to July 2018. Observational studies, investigating the effect of age at diabetes diagnosis on macrovascular and microvascular diabetes complications in adults with type 2 diabetes were selected according to pre-specified criteria. Two investigators independently extracted data and evaluated all studies. If data were not reported in a comparable format, data were obtained from authors, presented as minimally adjusted ORs (and 95% CIs) per 1 year increase in age at diabetes diagnosis, adjusted for current age for each outcome of interest. The study protocol was recorded with PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42016043593).
RESULTS
Data from 26 observational studies comprising 1,325,493 individuals from 30 countries were included. Random-effects meta-analyses with inverse variance weighting were used to obtain the pooled ORs. Age at diabetes diagnosis was inversely associated with risk of all-cause mortality and macrovascular and microvascular disease (all p < 0.001). Each 1 year increase in age at diabetes diagnosis was associated with a 4%, 3% and 5% decreased risk of all-cause mortality, macrovascular disease and microvascular disease, respectively, adjusted for current age. The effects were consistent for the individual components of the composite outcomes (all p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION
Younger, rather than older, age at diabetes diagnosis was associated with higher risk of mortality and vascular disease. Early and sustained interventions to delay type 2 diabetes onset and improve blood glucose levels and cardiovascular risk profiles of those already diagnosed are essential to reduce morbidity and mortality. Graphical abstract.
Topics: Age of Onset; Cerebrovascular Disorders; Coronary Disease; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Angiopathies; Diabetic Nephropathies; Diabetic Neuropathies; Diabetic Retinopathy; Humans; Mortality; Odds Ratio; Peripheral Vascular Diseases
PubMed: 33313987
DOI: 10.1007/s00125-020-05319-w -
Endocrinology, Diabetes & Metabolism Jan 2021The aim of this systematic review was to identify the best footwear and insole design features for offloading the plantar surface of the foot to prevent foot ulceration... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The aim of this systematic review was to identify the best footwear and insole design features for offloading the plantar surface of the foot to prevent foot ulceration in people with diabetic peripheral neuropathy. We searched multiple databases for published and unpublished studies reporting offloading footwear and insoles for people with diabetic neuropathy and nonulcerated feet. Primary outcome was foot ulcer incidence; other outcome measures considered were any standardized kinetic or kinematic measure indicating loading or offloading the plantar foot. Fifty-four studies, including randomized controlled studies, cohort studies, case-series, and a case-controlled and cross-sectional study were included. Three meta-analyses were conducted and random-effects modelling found peak plantar pressure reduction of arch profile (37 kPa (MD, -37.5; 95% CI, -72.29 to -3.61; < .03), metatarsal addition (35.96 kPa (MD, -35.96; 95% CI, -57.33 to -14.60; < .001) and pressure informed design 75.4 kPa (MD, -75.4 kPa; 95% CI, -127.4 to -23.44 kPa; < .004).The remaining data were presented in a narrative form due to heterogeneity. This review highlights the difficulty in differentiating the effect of different insole and footwear features in offloading the neuropathic diabetic foot. However, arch profiles, metatarsal additions and apertures are effective in reducing plantar pressure. The use of pressure analysis to enhance the effectiveness of the design of footwear and insoles, particularly through modification, is recommended.
Topics: Diabetic Foot; Diabetic Nephropathies; Equipment Design; Foot Orthoses; Humans; Shoes; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33532602
DOI: 10.1002/edm2.132 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2019This review updates part of an earlier Cochrane Review titled "Pregabalin for acute and chronic pain in adults", and considers only neuropathic pain (pain from damage to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
This review updates part of an earlier Cochrane Review titled "Pregabalin for acute and chronic pain in adults", and considers only neuropathic pain (pain from damage to nervous tissue). Antiepileptic drugs have long been used in pain management. Pregabalin is an antiepileptic drug used in management of chronic pain conditions.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of pregabalin for chronic neuropathic pain in adults.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase for randomised controlled trials from January 2009 to April 2018, online clinical trials registries, and reference lists.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised, double-blind trials of two weeks' duration or longer, comparing pregabalin (any route of administration) with placebo or another active treatment for neuropathic pain, with participant-reported pain assessment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality and biases. Primary outcomes were: at least 30% pain intensity reduction over baseline; much or very much improved on the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Scale (moderate benefit); at least 50% pain intensity reduction; or very much improved on PGIC (substantial benefit). We calculated risk ratio (RR) and number needed to treat for an additional beneficial (NNTB) or harmful outcome (NNTH). We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 45 studies lasting 2 to 16 weeks, with 11,906 participants - 68% from 31 new studies. Oral pregabalin doses of 150 mg, 300 mg, and 600 mg daily were compared with placebo. Postherpetic neuralgia, painful diabetic neuropathy, and mixed neuropathic pain predominated (85% of participants). High risk of bias was due mainly to small study size (nine studies), but many studies had unclear risk of bias, mainly due to incomplete outcome data, size, and allocation concealment.Postherpetic neuralgia: More participants had at least 30% pain intensity reduction with pregabalin 300 mg than with placebo (50% vs 25%; RR 2.1 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.6 to 2.6); NNTB 3.9 (3.0 to 5.6); 3 studies, 589 participants, moderate-quality evidence), and more had at least 50% pain intensity reduction (32% vs 13%; RR 2.5 (95% CI 1.9 to 3.4); NNTB 5.3 (3.9 to 8.1); 4 studies, 713 participants, moderate-quality evidence). More participants had at least 30% pain intensity reduction with pregabalin 600 mg than with placebo (62% vs 24%; RR 2.5 (95% CI 2.0 to 3.2); NNTB 2.7 (2.2 to 3.7); 3 studies, 537 participants, moderate-quality evidence), and more had at least 50% pain intensity reduction (41% vs 15%; RR 2.7 (95% CI 2.0 to 3.5); NNTB 3.9 (3.1 to 5.5); 4 studies, 732 participants, moderate-quality evidence). Somnolence and dizziness were more common with pregabalin than with placebo (moderate-quality evidence): somnolence 300 mg 16% versus 5.5%, 600 mg 25% versus 5.8%; dizziness 300 mg 29% versus 8.1%, 600 mg 35% versus 8.8%.Painful diabetic neuropathy: More participants had at least 30% pain intensity reduction with pregabalin 300 mg than with placebo (47% vs 42%; RR 1.1 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.2); NNTB 22 (12 to 200); 8 studies, 2320 participants, moderate-quality evidence), more had at least 50% pain intensity reduction (31% vs 24%; RR 1.3 (95% CI 1.2 to 1.5); NNTB 22 (12 to 200); 11 studies, 2931 participants, moderate-quality evidence), and more had PGIC much or very much improved (51% vs 30%; RR 1.8 (95% CI 1.5 to 2.0); NNTB 4.9 (3.8 to 6.9); 5 studies, 1050 participants, moderate-quality evidence). More participants had at least 30% pain intensity reduction with pregabalin 600 mg than with placebo (63% vs 52%; RR 1.2 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.4); NNTB 9.6 (5.5 to 41); 2 studies, 611 participants, low-quality evidence), and more had at least 50% pain intensity reduction (41% vs 28%; RR 1.4 (95% CI 1.2 to 1.7); NNTB 7.8 (5.4 to 14); 5 studies, 1015 participants, low-quality evidence). Somnolence and dizziness were more common with pregabalin than with placebo (moderate-quality evidence): somnolence 300 mg 11% versus 3.1%, 600 mg 15% versus 4.5%; dizziness 300 mg 13% versus 3.8%, 600 mg 22% versus 4.4%.Mixed or unclassified post-traumatic neuropathic pain: More participants had at least 30% pain intensity reduction with pregabalin 600 mg than with placebo (48% vs 36%; RR 1.2 (1.1 to 1.4); NNTB 8.2 (5.7 to 15); 4 studies, 1367 participants, low-quality evidence), and more had at least 50% pain intensity reduction (34% vs 20%; RR 1.5 (1.2 to 1.9); NNTB 7.2 (5.4 to 11); 4 studies, 1367 participants, moderate-quality evidence). Somnolence (12% vs 3.9%) and dizziness (23% vs 6.2%) were more common with pregabalin.Central neuropathic pain: More participants had at least 30% pain intensity reduction with pregabalin 600 mg than with placebo (44% vs 28%; RR 1.6 (1.3 to 2.0); NNTB 5.9 (4.1 to 11); 3 studies, 562 participants, low-quality evidence) and at least 50% pain intensity reduction (26% vs 15%; RR 1.7 (1.2 to 2.3); NNTB 9.8 (6.0 to 28); 3 studies, 562 participants, low-quality evidence). Somnolence (32% vs 11%) and dizziness (23% vs 8.6%) were more common with pregabalin.Other neuropathic pain conditions: Studies show no evidence of benefit for 600 mg pregabalin in HIV neuropathy (2 studies, 674 participants, moderate-quality evidence) and limited evidence of benefit in neuropathic back pain or sciatica, neuropathic cancer pain, or polyneuropathy.Serious adverse events, all conditions: Serious adverse events were no more common with placebo than with pregabalin 300 mg (3.1% vs 2.6%; RR 1.2 (95% CI 0.8 to 1.7); 17 studies, 4112 participants, high-quality evidence) or pregabalin 600 mg (3.4% vs 3.4%; RR 1.1 (95% CI 0.8 to 1.5); 16 studies, 3995 participants, high-quality evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Evidence shows efficacy of pregabalin in postherpetic neuralgia, painful diabetic neuralgia, and mixed or unclassified post-traumatic neuropathic pain, and absence of efficacy in HIV neuropathy; evidence of efficacy in central neuropathic pain is inadequate. Some people will derive substantial benefit with pregabalin; more will have moderate benefit, but many will have no benefit or will discontinue treatment. There were no substantial changes since the 2009 review.
Topics: Acute Disease; Adult; Analgesics; Chronic Disease; Diabetic Neuropathies; Dizziness; Humans; Neuralgia; Neuralgia, Postherpetic; Pain; Pregabalin; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sleepiness
PubMed: 30673120
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007076.pub3