-
BMJ Open Jan 2019To assess the benefits and harms of pregabalin in the management of neuropathic pain. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To assess the benefits and harms of pregabalin in the management of neuropathic pain.
DESIGN
Rapid review and meta-analysis of phase III, randomised, placebo-controlled trials.
PARTICIPANTS
Adults aged 18 years and above with neuropathic pain defined according to the International Association for the Study of Pain criteria.
INTERVENTIONS
Pregabalin or placebo.
PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES
Our primary outcomes were pain (as measured using validated scales) and adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were sleep disturbance, quality of life, Patient Global Impression of Change, Clinician Global Impression scale, anxiety and depression scores, overall discontinuations and discontinuations because of adverse events.
RESULTS
We included 28 trials comprising 6087 participants. The neuropathic pain conditions studied were diabetic peripheral neuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia, herpes zoster, sciatica (radicular pain), poststroke pain and spinal cord injury-related pain. Patients who took pregabalin reported significant reductions in pain (numerical rating scale (NRS)) compared with placebo (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.49 (95% CI -0.66 to -0.32, p<0.00001), very low quality evidence). Pregabalin significantly reduced sleep interference scores (NRS) compared with placebo (SMD -0.38 (95% CI -0.50 to -0.26, p<0.00001), moderate quality evidence. Pregabalin significantly increased the risk of adverse events compared with placebo (RR 1.33 (95% CI 1.23 to 1.44, p<0.00001, low quality evidence)). The risks of experiencing weight gain, somnolence, dizziness, peripheral oedema, fatigue, visual disturbances, ataxia, non-peripheral oedema, vertigo and euphoria were significantly increased with pregabalin. Pregabalin was significantly more likely than placebo to lead to discontinuation of the drug because of adverse events (RR 1.91 (95% CI 1.54 to 2.37, p<0.00001), low quality evidence).
CONCLUSION
Pregabalin has beneficial effects on some symptoms of neuropathic pain. However, its use significantly increases the risk of a number of adverse events and discontinuation due to adverse events. The quality of the evidence from journal publications is low.
Topics: Adult; Analgesics; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Double-Blind Method; Humans; Neuralgia; Pregabalin; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30670513
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023600 -
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 -
Current Medical Research and Opinion Apr 2018Gabapentin (Neurontin ) and pregabalin (Lyrica ) are first- and second-generation α2δ ligands, respectively, and are both approved for use as adjunctive therapy in... (Review)
Review
Gabapentin (Neurontin ) and pregabalin (Lyrica ) are first- and second-generation α2δ ligands, respectively, and are both approved for use as adjunctive therapy in pain control. Although they do not bind to gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptors they have been successfully used to treat neuropathic pain conditions. Their mechanism of action is not yet fully understood, but research has demonstrated promising results. Despite their similarities, they have been used in combination in both clinical and research situations, and have been noted to have a synergistic effect in pain control without concern for clinically significant pharmacokinetic interactions. This combined approach can be made use of to reduce the dose of an individual agent, its side effects, and to enhance therapeutic response compared to a single agent. Pharmacokinetics, drug interactions, and adverse reaction to combinations have to be taken into consideration before combination therapy with gabapentin and pregabalin is proposed as first-line treatment in refractory pain situations and in patients with low levels of tolerance for an individual agent.
Topics: Analgesics; Drug Therapy, Combination; Gabapentin; Humans; Neuralgia; Pregabalin
PubMed: 29023146
DOI: 10.1080/03007995.2017.1391756 -
Clinical Pharmacology in Drug... Mar 2018
Topics: Anti-Anxiety Agents; Anxiety Disorders; GABA Agents; Gabapentin; Humans; Pregabalin; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 29579375
DOI: 10.1002/cpdd.446 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2022This is an updated version of the Cochrane Review last published in Issue 7, 2019; it includes two additional studies. Epilepsy is a common neurological disease that... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
This is an updated version of the Cochrane Review last published in Issue 7, 2019; it includes two additional studies. Epilepsy is a common neurological disease that affects approximately 1% of the UK population. Approximately one-third of these people continue to have seizures despite drug treatment. Pregabalin is one of the newer antiepileptic drugs that has been developed to improve outcomes. In this review we summarised the current evidence regarding pregabalin when used as an add-on treatment for drug-resistant focal epilepsy.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and tolerability of pregabalin when used as an add-on treatment for drug-resistant focal epilepsy.
SEARCH METHODS
For the latest update we searched the following databases on 16 November 2020: Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), and MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to 16 November 2020). CRS Web includes randomised or quasi-randomised, controlled trials from PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organisation International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the Specialised Registers of Cochrane Review Groups, including Epilepsy. We imposed no language restrictions. We contacted the manufacturers of pregabalin and authors in the field to identify any relevant unpublished studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials comparing pregabalin with placebo or an alternative antiepileptic drug as an add-on for people of any age with drug-resistant focal epilepsy. Double-blind and single-blind trials were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome was 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency; secondary outcomes were seizure freedom, treatment withdrawal for any reason, treatment withdrawal due to adverse effects, and proportion of individuals experiencing adverse effects.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion and extracted the relevant data. Primary analyses were intention-to-treat (ITT). We presented summary risk ratios (RRs) and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We evaluated dose response in regression models. We carried out a risk of bias assessment for each included study using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and assessed the overall certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 11 randomised controlled trials (3949 participants). Nine trials compared pregabalin to placebo. For the primary outcome, participants randomised to pregabalin were significantly more likely to attain a 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency compared to placebo (RR 1.95, 95% CI 1.40 to 2.72, 9 trials, 2663 participants, low-certainty evidence). The odds of response doubled with an increase in dose from 300 mg/day to 600 mg/day (OR 1.99, 95% CI 1.74 to 2.28), indicating a dose-response relationship. Pregabalin was significantly associated with seizure freedom (RR 3.94, 95% CI 1.50 to 10.37, 4 trials, 1125 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). Participants were significantly more likely to withdraw from pregabalin treatment than placebo for any reason (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.60; 9 trials, 2663 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and for adverse effects (RR 2.60, 95% CI 1.86 to 3.64; 9 trials, 2663 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Three trials compared pregabalin to three active-control drugs: lamotrigine, eventrate and gabapentin. Participants allocated to pregabalin were significantly more likely to achieve a 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency than those allocated to lamotrigine (RR 1.47, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.12; 1 trial, 293 participants) but not those allocated to eventrate (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.11; 1 trial, 509 participants) or gabapentin (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.12; 1 trial, 484 participants). We found no significant differences between pregabalin and lamotrigine for seizure freedom (RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.40 to 4.83). However, significantly fewer participants achieved seizure freedom with add-on pregabalin compared to eventrate (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.85). No data were reported for this outcome for pregabalin versus gabapentin. We detected no significant differences in treatment withdrawal rate for any reason or due to adverse effects, specifically, during either pooled analysis or subgroup analysis. Ataxia, dizziness, somnolence, weight gain, headache and fatigue were significantly associated with pregabalin than in active control. We rated the overall risk of bias in the included studies as low or unclear due to the possibility of publication bias and lack of methodological details provided. We assessed all the studies to be at a high risk of funding bias as they were all sponsored by Pfizer. We rated the certainty of the evidence as very low to moderate using the GRADE approach.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
For people with drug-resistant focal epilepsy, pregabalin when used as an add-on treatment was significantly more effective than placebo at producing a 50% or greater seizure reduction and seizure freedom. Results demonstrated efficacy for doses from 150 mg/day to 600 mg/day, with increasing effectiveness at 600 mg doses, although there were issues with tolerability at higher doses. However, the trials included in this review were of short duration, and longer-term trials are needed to inform clinical decision-making. This review focused on the use of pregabalin in drug-resistant focal epilepsy, and the results cannot be generalised to add-on treatment for generalised epilepsies. Likewise, no inference can be made about the effects of pregabalin when used as monotherapy.
Topics: Drug Resistant Epilepsy; Drug Therapy, Combination; Epilepsies, Partial; Humans; Pregabalin; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 35349176
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005612.pub5 -
Current Drug Safety 2022Pregabalin is used in the treatment of neuropathic pain of various etiologies and as an adjuvant in epilepsy. Blockade of the α2δ subunit of L and N-type Ca-channels... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Pregabalin is used in the treatment of neuropathic pain of various etiologies and as an adjuvant in epilepsy. Blockade of the α2δ subunit of L and N-type Ca-channels is its main mechanism of neurotropic action. Compared to other antiepileptics like phenytoin, valproate and lamotrigine, and other neuropathic pain medications such as amitriptyline and duloxetine, pregabalin has a relatively favorable safety profile and hence is a drug of choice for many geriatricians.
CASE PRESENTATION
Here we describe a case of maculopapular rash induced by pregabalin in an older man, which resolved with withdrawal of the offending drug and conservative management.
CONCLUSION
We have also conducted a literature review of similar cases and highlighted the clinical patterns and management strategies for pregabalin-induced skin rashes.
Topics: Aged; Amitriptyline; Analgesics; Anticonvulsants; Exanthema; Humans; Male; Neuralgia; Pregabalin
PubMed: 35264095
DOI: 10.2174/1574886317666220309143913 -
Drugs Jan 2021A 2017 systematic review (SR) identified 59 studies examining gabapentinoid (pregabalin and gabapentin) misuse/abuse. Evidence of gabapentinoid misuse/abuse has since...
BACKGROUND
A 2017 systematic review (SR) identified 59 studies examining gabapentinoid (pregabalin and gabapentin) misuse/abuse. Evidence of gabapentinoid misuse/abuse has since grown substantially.
OBJECTIVE
Update previous SR and describe new insights regarding gabapentinoid abuse.
METHODS
A SR of PubMed was conducted to identify studies published from 7/29/2016-8/31/2020. Four searches were performed using the following terms: "gabapentin [MeSH] OR pregabalin [MeSH] OR gabapentinoid" AND one of the following substance misuse/abuse-related terms: "substance-related disorders [MeSH]", "overdose", "abuse", or "misuse". Clinicaltrials.gov and the Cochrane Library database were searched to identify ongoing studies or similar SRs. Reference lists of included studies were reviewed to identify additional literature. All studies with novel data related to pregabalin and/or gabapentin abuse, misuse, or overdose conducted during the study period were included. Articles not written in English, review articles, and animal studies were excluded.
RESULTS
Fifty-five studies were included (29 [52.7%] from North America, 17 [30.9%] Europe, 6 [10.9%] Asia, and 3 [5.5%] Australia). Forty-six observational studies and 10 case reports/series were included (one manuscript included both). Twenty (36.4%) studied gabapentin only, 18 (32.7%) pregabalin only, and 17 (30.9%) both pregabalin/gabapentin. These studies corroborate findings from the previous SR that gabapentinoids are increasingly abused or misused to self-medicate, that gabapentinoids can produce desirable effects alone but are often used concomitantly with other drugs, and that opioid use disorder is the greatest risk factor for gabapentinoid abuse. While the original SR identified the largest studies having been published in Europe, this review identified several more generalisable US studies that have subsequently been conducted. The most concerning finding was increased evidence of associated patient harm, including increased hospital utilisation and opioid-related overdose mortality risk.
CONCLUSION
Evidence suggests that gabapentinoid misuse/abuse represents a growing trend that is causing significant patient harm. Prescribers should exercise appropriate caution with use in high-risk populations and monitor for signs of misuse or abuse.
Topics: Animals; Drug Overdose; Gabapentin; Humans; Pregabalin
PubMed: 33215352
DOI: 10.1007/s40265-020-01432-7 -
Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics Nov 2016The first two alphadelta ligands - gabapentin (GBP) and pregabalin (PGB) - were initially synthesized as antiepileptics; however, they were later also found to be useful... (Review)
Review
The first two alphadelta ligands - gabapentin (GBP) and pregabalin (PGB) - were initially synthesized as antiepileptics; however, they were later also found to be useful for the treatment of additional conditions. Areas covered: Relevant publications describing potential underlying mechanisms, clinical pharmacokinetics/pharmacokinetics, and clinical efficacy and safety of these drugs in various disease conditions were searched in PubMed and Scopus and included in this review. Expert commentary: GBP and PGB are effective for the treatment neuropathic pain, fibromyalgia and epilepsy; in addition, they may be useful for the reduction of postoperative pain. PGB is also effective for the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder and GBP for the treatment of restless legs syndrome. GBP may be considered a treatment option for pain associated with Guillain-Barré Syndrome and phantom limb and for the management of uremic pruritus. Mirogabalin (MGB), recently developed, is being investigated for the treatment of peripheral neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia, showing promising results in patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathy. Their most frequent adverse reactions are of neuropsychiatric nature and include fatigue, dizziness, sedation, somnolence, and ataxia; peripheral edema and weight gain are also frequently described. Pharmacokinetic interactions are scarce; however, pharmacodynamic interactions have been described in association with drugs with CNS-depressant effects.
Topics: Amines; Bridged Bicyclo Compounds; Calcium Channel Blockers; Cyclohexanecarboxylic Acids; Gabapentin; Humans; Ligands; Nervous System Diseases; Pregabalin; gamma-Aminobutyric Acid
PubMed: 27345098
DOI: 10.1080/14737175.2016.1202764 -
Journal of Neuroinflammation Sep 2022Radiation-induced brain injury (RIBI) is the most serious complication of radiotherapy in patients with head and neck tumors, which seriously affects the quality of...
BACKGROUND
Radiation-induced brain injury (RIBI) is the most serious complication of radiotherapy in patients with head and neck tumors, which seriously affects the quality of life. Currently, there is no effective treatment for patients with RIBI, and identifying new treatment that targets the pathological mechanisms of RIBI is urgently needed.
METHODS
Immunofluorescence staining, western blotting, quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (Q-PCR), co-culture of primary neurons and microglia, terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase dUTP nick-end labeling (TUNEL) assay, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and CRISPR-Cas9-mediated gene editing techniques were employed to investigate the protective effects and underlying mechanisms of pregabalin that ameliorate microglial activation and neuronal injury in the RIBI mouse model.
RESULTS
Our findings showed that pregabalin effectively repressed microglial activation, thereby reducing neuronal damage in the RIBI mouse model. Pregabalin mitigated inflammatory responses by directly inhibiting cytoplasmic translocation of high-mobility group box 1 (HMGB1), a pivotal protein released by irradiated neurons which induced subsequent activation of microglia and inflammatory cytokine expression. Knocking out neuronal HMGB1 or microglial TLR2/TLR4/RAGE by CRISPR/Cas9 technique significantly inhibited radiation-induced NF-κB activation and pro-inflammatory transition of microglia.
CONCLUSIONS
Our findings indicate the protective mechanism of pregabalin in mitigating microglial activation and neuronal injury in RIBI. It also provides a therapeutic strategy by targeting HMGB1-TLR2/TLR4/RAGE signaling pathway in the microglia for the treatment of RIBI.
Topics: Animals; Brain Injuries; Cytokines; DNA Nucleotidylexotransferase; HMGB1 Protein; Mice; Microglia; NF-kappa B; Neurons; Pregabalin; Quality of Life; Signal Transduction; Toll-Like Receptor 2; Toll-Like Receptor 4
PubMed: 36131309
DOI: 10.1186/s12974-022-02596-7 -
Daru : Journal of Faculty of Pharmacy,... Dec 2020Herpes zoster is an acute, painful, herpes skin disease caused by varicella-zoster virus, which may cause viral meningitis. Pregabalin has been shown to be efficacious... (Review)
Review
Herpes zoster is an acute, painful, herpes skin disease caused by varicella-zoster virus, which may cause viral meningitis. Pregabalin has been shown to be efficacious in the treatment of pain in patients with herpes zoster. However, it has the side effects of neurotoxicity. We describe a 68-year-old female patient with herpes zoster, and she was treated with pregabalin. The patient presented with stuttering and frequent blepharospasm after 3 days of pregabalin treatment. Pregabalin was discontinued, the symptoms of stuttering and frequent blepharospasm completely resolved without any special treatment after one week. In this case, the etiology of stuttering and frequent blepharospasm may be related to pregabalin. Clinicians should be alert to the rare symptoms associated with the use of pregabalin. Graphical abstract .
Topics: Aged; Blepharospasm; Female; Herpes Zoster; Humans; Pregabalin; Stuttering; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32632575
DOI: 10.1007/s40199-020-00354-9