-
Journal of Alzheimer's Disease : JAD 2017Type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) is a major subtype of diabetes and is usually diagnosed at a young age with insulin deficiency. The life expectancy of T1DM patients has... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) is a major subtype of diabetes and is usually diagnosed at a young age with insulin deficiency. The life expectancy of T1DM patients has increased substantially in comparison with that three decades ago due to the availability of exogenous insulin, though it is still shorter than that of healthy people. However, the relation remains unclear between T1DM and dementia as an aging-related disease. We conducted a systematic review of existing literature on T1DM and cognition impairments by carrying out searches in electronic databases Medline, EMBASE, and Google Scholar. We restricted our review to studies involving only human subjects and excluded studies on type 2 diabetes mellitus or non-classified diabetes. A meta-analysis was first performed on the relationship between T1DM and cognitive changes in youths and adults respectively. Then the review focused on the cognitive complications of T1DM and their relation with the characteristics of T1DM, glycemic control, diabetic complications, comorbidities, and others. First, age at onset, disease duration, and glycemic dysregulation were delineated for their association with cognitive changes. Then diabetic ketoacidosis, angiopathy, and neuropathy were examined as diabetic complications for their involvement in cognitive impairments. Lastly, body mass index and blood pressure were discussed for their relations with the cognitive changes. Future studies are needed to elucidate the pathogenesis of T1DM-related cognitive impairments or dementia.
Topics: Cognitive Dysfunction; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Humans
PubMed: 28222533
DOI: 10.3233/JAD-161250 -
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 -
Frontiers in Medicine 2021Neuropathic pain (NP), a severe and disruptive symptom following many diseases, normally restricts patients' physical functions and leads to anxiety and depression. As...
Neuropathic pain (NP), a severe and disruptive symptom following many diseases, normally restricts patients' physical functions and leads to anxiety and depression. As an economical and effective therapy, exercise may be helpful in NP management. However, few guidelines and reviews focused on exercise therapy for NP associated with specific diseases. The study aimed to summarize the effectiveness and efficacy of exercise for various diseases with NP supported by evidence, describe expert recommendations for NP from different causes, and inform policymakers of the guidelines. A systematic review and expert consensus. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed. We included systematic review and meta-analysis, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which assessed patients with NP. Studies involved exercise intervention and outcome included pain intensity at least. Physiotherapy Evidence Database and the Assessment of Multiple Systematic reviews tool were used to grade the quality assessment of the included RCTs and systematic reviews, respectively. The final grades of recommendation were based on strength of evidence and a consensus discussion of results of Delphi rounds by the Delphi consensus panel including 21 experts from the Chinese Association of Rehabilitation Medicine. Eight systematic reviews and 21 RCTs fulfilled all of the inclusion criteria and were included, which were used to create the 10 evidence-based consensus statements. The 10 expert recommendations regarding exercise for NP symptoms were relevant to the following 10 different diseases: spinal cord injury, stroke, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, cervical radiculopathy, sciatica, diabetic neuropathy, chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, HIV/AIDS, and surgery, respectively. The exercise recommended in the expert consensus involved but was not limited to muscle stretching, strengthening/resistance exercise, aerobic exercise, motor control/stabilization training and mind-body exercise (Tai Chi and yoga). Based on the available evidence, exercise is helpful to alleviate NP intensity. Therefore, these expert consensuses recommend that proper exercise programs can be considered as an effective alternative treatment or complementary therapy for most patients with NP. The expert consensus provided medical staff and policymakers with applicable recommendations for the formulation of exercise prescription for NP. This consensus statement will require regular updates after five-ten years.
PubMed: 34901069
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2021.756940 -
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 -
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 -
Reviews in Endocrine & Metabolic... Aug 2023Emerging evidence suggests that treatment with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) could be an interesting treatment strategy to reduce neurological... (Review)
Review
Emerging evidence suggests that treatment with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) could be an interesting treatment strategy to reduce neurological complications such as stroke, cognitive impairment, and peripheral neuropathy. We performed a systematic review to examine the evidence concerning the effects of GLP-1 RAs on neurological complications of diabetes. The databases used were Pubmed, Scopus and Cochrane. We selected clinical trials which analysed the effect of GLP-1 RAs on stroke, cognitive impairment, and peripheral neuropathy. We found a total of 19 studies: 8 studies include stroke or major cardiovascular events, 7 involve cognitive impairment and 4 include peripheral neuropathy. Semaglutide subcutaneous and dulaglutide reduced stroke cases. Liraglutide, albiglutide, oral semaglutide and efpeglenatide, were not shown to reduce the number of strokes but did reduce major cardiovascular events. Exenatide, dulaglutide and liraglutide improved general cognition but no significant effect on diabetic peripheral neuropathy has been reported with GLP-1 RAs. GLP-1 RAs are promising drugs that seem to be useful in the reduction of some neurological complications of diabetes. However, more studies are needed.
Topics: Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Liraglutide; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor; Glucagon-Like Peptide 1; Cardiovascular Diseases; Stroke; Diabetes Complications
PubMed: 37231200
DOI: 10.1007/s11154-023-09807-3 -
International Journal of Environmental... Feb 2021(1) Background: Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is the most common peripheral neuropathy in the upper extremity. Conservative treatment has been effective for mild and... (Review)
Review
(1) Background: Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is the most common peripheral neuropathy in the upper extremity. Conservative treatment has been effective for mild and moderate idiopathic CTS. However, severe CTS and systemic conditions were an exclusion criterion from the studies. The aim of this study is to review the effectiveness of conservative treatment in patients with CTS regardless of the level of severity and the presence or not of systemic diseases in the last ten years. (2) Methods: Randomized controlled clinical trials that compared the effect of conservative treatment on the Boston questionnaire and pain were selected. PubMed, PEDro, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases were used. PRISMA statement checklist was performed. (3) Results: 876 studies were recorded, 29 were selected. Pharmacology, Electrotherapy and Manual Therapy had benefits for CTS. Electrotherapy and manual therapy could be effective for severe CTS patients with a systemic condition in the short term, but there was a low percentage of these patients included in the studies. (4) Conclusion: Some pharmacological treatments, manual therapy and electrotherapy have shown benefits for handling CTS, although the most effective combination of techniques is unknown. It would be necessary to include patients with systemic conditions in the selection criteria for future studies.
Topics: Boston; Carpal Tunnel Syndrome; Conservative Treatment; Humans; Musculoskeletal Manipulations; Pain; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33671060
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18052365 -
Cureus Jun 2022Diabetic neuropathy is a clinical condition that can have a significant impact on quality of life, presenting as numbness, tingling, and burning in the extremities.... (Review)
Review
Diabetic neuropathy is a clinical condition that can have a significant impact on quality of life, presenting as numbness, tingling, and burning in the extremities. Current treatment options focus on symptom alleviation and reducing exposure to risk factors as treating the pathophysiological causes of diabetic neuropathy remains a significant challenge. Novel studies have proposed that the use of antioxidants, including alpha-lipoic acid (⍺-lipoic acid), may represent a beneficial intervention for treating neuropathic pain in diabetic patients. This study aims to evaluate the effect of ⍺-lipoic acid in the treatment of diabetic neuropathy and determine its effectiveness in reducing the symptoms of diabetic neuropathy. To achieve our objective, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were screened on March 3, 2022. Randomized controlled trials that investigated ⍺-lipoic acid treatment in diabetes mellitus patients with neuropathic pain and made an appropriate comparison were included. The reduction of neuropathic symptoms was the primary outcome, and the secondary outcome was the incidence of adverse events. Eight studies comprising 1,500 diabetic patients were evaluated in this systematic review. The findings were inconsistent among the literature concerning the effectiveness of ⍺-lipoic acid in the treatment of diabetic neuropathy, with three trials (37.5%) observing significant improvements in symptoms and five trials (62.5%) not observing any notable results. All studies found ⍺-lipoic acid to be a safe and tolerable intervention, with no reported adverse effects. The administration of ⍺-lipoic acid may result in symptom reduction and offers a safe and tolerable treatment option. However, there is limited evidence to support the beneficial outcomes of this approach. Further trials are warranted to corroborate or contradict the hypothesis that ⍺-lipoic acid is an effective intervention for the treatment of diabetic neuropathy.
PubMed: 35812639
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.25750 -
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 -
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