中国科技论文统计源期刊 中文核心期刊  
美国《化学文摘》《国际药学文摘》
《乌利希期刊指南》
WHO《西太平洋地区医学索引》来源期刊  
日本科学技术振兴机构数据库(JST)
第七届湖北十大名刊提名奖  
医药导报, 2017, 36(3): 336-341
doi: 10.3870/j.issn.1004-0781.2017.03.022
普瑞巴林治疗带状疱疹后神经痛的临床评价
罗宏丽, 肖顺林, 王海雪

摘要:

目的 评价普瑞巴林治疗带状疱疹后神经痛的有效性和安全性。方法 计算机检索Pubmed、Embase、CBM、CNKI、VIP 和万方数据库,纳入关于普瑞巴林治疗带状疱疹后神经痛的随机对照试验,检索时间均为建库至2015 年8 月。采用Review Manager 5.3.5 版软件对纳入的研究进行Meta 分析。结果 共纳入7项研究,1 226例患者。Meta分析结果显示,普瑞巴林组有效率[RR=2.82,95%CI(2.27,3.50),P<0.01 ]、患者总体印象变化[RR=1.77,95%CI(1.43,2.18),P<0. 01]明显高于安慰药组,研究终点疼痛评分[WMD=-1.36,95%CI( -1.62,-1.10),P<0. 01]、疼痛对睡眠的影响程度评分[WMD=-1.26,95%CI( -1.52,-1.00),P<0. 01]、简式McGill疼痛问卷视觉模拟量表评分[WMD=-13.44,95%CI( -17.72,-9.16),P<0. 01]明显低于安慰药组。不良反应发生率高于安慰药组[RR=2.48,95%CI(2.00,3.07),P<0. 01],不良反应为轻微到中度,可耐受。与阿米替林组比较,普瑞巴林组疗效较好,不良反应发生率较低。与5%利多卡因药膏比较,普瑞巴林疗效较差,不良反应发生率较高。结论 普瑞巴林治疗带状疱疹后神经痛疗效较好,不良反应轻且耐受性较好。

关键词: 普瑞巴林 ; 神经痛 ; 带状疱疹 ; 随机对照试验 ; Meta分析 ; 系统评价

Abstract:

带状疱疹后神经痛(postherpetic neuralgia,PHN)是指带状疱疹皮疹消退后或在疼痛缓解后再次发生的持续超过4周的疼痛,是一种典型的神经病理性疼痛,10%~20%带状疱疹患者会发生。疼痛性质可从轻微到极度、持续的、间断的或由极小刺激诱发的疼痛;可持续数周、数月,甚至数年,并导致患者焦虑、抑郁、睡眠时间缩短等,严重影响患者生活质量[1]。目前国外多个关于PHN 药物治疗指南中均把钙离子通道调节药、抗抑郁药、局部用利多卡因等作为一线治疗用药[2-3]。普瑞巴林是一种钙离子通道调节药,能调节电压门控钙通道α2 -δ亚基,减少谷氨酸、去甲肾上腺素和P物质释放,既能减轻疼痛也可改善患者睡眠和情绪。已有Meta分析结果指出,普瑞巴林治疗糖尿病性神经痛、PHN、癌性神经痛等多种神经病理性疼痛有较高的有效性和安全性[4]。本研究主要对已发表的有关普瑞巴林治疗PHN的随机对照试验(randomized controlled trials,RCT)进行系统评价,以便为临床医生合理选择PHN治疗药物提供参考。

1 资料与方法
1.1 纳入和排除标准

1.1.1 研究类型 纳入与普瑞巴林治疗PHN相关的RCT,语种限中文和英文。

1.1.2 研究对象 ①明确诊断为PHN,排除其他原因,如糖尿病、酒精中毒或维生素B12缺乏等因素引起的神经病理性疼痛;②年龄>18岁,排除妊娠期或哺乳期女性患者;③带状疱疹治愈后遗留神经痛症状>1个月;④疼痛评分量表(0~10)≥4或简式McGill 疼痛问卷(Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire,SF-MPQ)中的视觉模拟量表(visual analog scale,VAS)评分(0~100 mm)≥40 mm;⑤无心、肝、肾、肺等重要器官器质性疾病。

1.1.3 干预措施 试验组为普瑞巴林,对照组为安慰药、阿米替林、含5%利多卡因膏。

1.1.4 结局指标 采用下列一项或者多项有效性和安全性指标的试验可被纳入:①反应有效率( 平均疼痛评分减少≥50%的比例);②研究终点疼痛评分;③疼痛对睡眠的影响程度评分;④VAS评分;⑤患者总体印象变化(patient global impression of change,PGIC);⑥不良反应发生率,包括眩晕、嗜睡、头痛、外周水肿及口干等。

1.2 检索策略

计算机检索Pubmed、Embase、CBM、CNKI、VIP 和万方数据库,纳入关于普瑞巴林治疗PHN的RCT,检索时间均为建库至2015 年8 月。检索采用主题词与自由词相结合的方式,英文检索词:pregabalin,postherpetic neuralgia randomized controlled trials;中文检索词:普瑞巴林、带状疱疹后神经痛。

1.3 文献筛选与资料提取

由2位研究者按照纳入与排除标准独立进行文献筛选和资料提取,如遇分歧,则通过讨论或由第三位研究者协助解决。资料提取内容主要包括:研究基本情况及特征、纳入和排除标准、反映研究质量的相关数据、主要结局指标以及不良反应等。

1.4 文献质量评价

纳入研究的质量评价依据改良Jadad评分量表进行,具体方法如下:随机序列的产生恰当为2分,不清楚为1分,不恰当为0分;分配隐藏恰当为2分,不清楚为1分,不恰当为0分;盲法恰当为2 分,不清楚为1分,不恰当为0 分;撤出与退出描述为1分,未描述为0分。评分1~3分为低质量研究,4~7 分为高质量研究。

1.5 统计学方法

采用Cochrane协作网提供的Review manager 5.3.5版统计软件进行Meta分析。计数资料采用相对危险度(relative ratio,RR),计量资料采用加权均数差(weighted mean difference,WMD),各效应量均以95%置信区间(confidence interval,CI) 表示。采用χ2 检验进行异质性检验,若各研究结果间无统计学异质性(P>0.1,I2<50%),采用固定效应模型;若研究结果间存在统计学异质性(P<0.1,I2>50%)而无临床异质性,采用随机效应模型,并分析异质性来源。

2 结果
2.1 纳入研究的基本特征和质量评价

根据检索策略,初检文献306篇,经逐层筛选后,最终纳入RCT文献7篇[5-11],均为英文文献,共1 226例患者。纳入的7个研究均报告了基线资料(患者的性别、年龄、病程等),基本特征见表1。采用改良Jadad评分量表评估纳入研究,5篇文献评分≥4分,总体研究质量较高。各纳入研究的质量评价见表2。

表1 纳入研究的基本特征
研究对象 药物 剂量/(mg·d-1) 病例数 疗程/周 结局指标
Dworkin 2003 普瑞巴林、安慰药 300~600 89/84 8 ①②③④⑤⑥
Sabatowski 2004 普瑞巴林、安慰药 150,300 81/76/81 8 ①②③④⑤⑥
Seventer 2006 普瑞巴林、安慰药 150,300,300~600 87/98/90/93 13 ①②③⑤⑥
Stacey 2008 普瑞巴林、安慰药 300,150~600 88/91/90 4 ①③④⑥
Achar 2010 普瑞巴林、阿米替林 150 15/15 8 ①⑥
Achar 2012 普瑞巴林、阿米替林 150 25/25 8 ①⑥
Rehm 2010 普瑞巴林、利多卡因 150~600 48/50 4 ①④⑥

①反应有效率;②研究终点疼痛评分;③疼痛对睡眠的影响程度评分;④VAS评分;⑤PGIC;⑥不良反应发生率

表1 纳入研究的基本特征

表2 纳入研究的质量评价
研究对象 随机方法 分配隐藏 盲法 撤出与退出 改良的Jadad评分
Dworkin 2003 随机数字表 密封信封 双盲 描述 7
Sabatowski 2004 随机数字表 密封信封 双盲 描述 7
Seventer 2006 不清楚 不清楚 双盲 描述 5
Stacey 2008 不清楚 不清楚 双盲 描述 5
Achar 2010 不清楚 不清楚 不清楚 描述 4
Achar 2012 奇偶数 不清楚 不清楚 描述 3
Rehm 2010 不清楚 不清楚 非盲 描述 3

表2 纳入研究的质量评价

2.2 普瑞巴林与安慰药

由于不同用药剂量会造成各项结局指标有差异,而在纳入研究中,普瑞巴林使用剂量不同。因此,本系统评价将根据药物日剂量进行亚组分析,包括150,300,150~600 mg·d-1

2.2.1 治疗PHN有效率 4个研究比较了普瑞巴林与安慰药治疗PHN的有效率,异质性检验结果显示各研究间不具有异质性(P=0.71,I2=0%),故采用固定效应模型。Meta分析结果显示,2 组之间有效率比较差异有统计学意义[RR=2.82,95%CI(2.27,3.50),P<0.01]。亚组分析显示,3个亚组内同质性均比较好(P=0.60,I2=0%),(P=0.52,I2=0%),(P=0.26,I2=26%)。与安慰药比较,普瑞巴林3个剂量组均差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。见图1。

图1 普瑞巴林组与安慰药组反应有效率比较的Meta分析

2.2.2 研究终点疼痛评分 研究终点疼痛评分越低,治疗效果越显著。 3个研究比较了普瑞巴林与安慰药治疗PHN的研究终点疼痛评分,异质性检验结果显示各研究间异质性较小(P=0.28,I2=20%),故采用固定效应模型。Meta分析结果显示,2 组之间在研究终点疼痛评分方面比较差异有统计学意义[WMD=-1.36,95%CI( -1.62,-1.10),P<0.01]。亚组分析显示,3个亚组内同质性均较好(P=0.50,I2=0%),(P=0.27,I2=17%),(P=0.83,I2=0%)。与安慰药比较,普瑞巴林3个剂量组均差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。见图2。

图2 普瑞巴林组与安慰药组研究终点疼痛评分比较的Meta分析

2.2.3 疼痛对睡眠的影响程度评分 评分越低,疼痛对睡眠的影响越小,治疗效果越显著。4个研究比较了普瑞巴林与安慰药治疗PHN的疼痛对睡眠的影响程度评分。异质性检验结果显示,各研究间存在明显异质性(P=0.03,I2=55%),故采用随机效应模型。Meta分析结果显示,2 组间在疼痛对睡眠的影响程度评分方面比较,差异有统计学意义[WMD=-1.26,95%CI( -1.52,-1.00),P<0.01]。亚组分析显示,普瑞巴林150 mg与150~600 mg,无明显异质性(P=0.85,I2=0%),(P=0.15,I2=48%);300 mg·d-1存在明显异质性(P=0.09,I2=59%)。与安慰药组比较,普瑞巴林3个剂量组均差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。见图3。

图3 普瑞巴林组与安慰药组疼痛对睡眠的影响程度评分比较的Meta分析

2.2.4 VAS评分 用简式McGill疼痛问卷中的VAS评分对总体疼痛状况进行评估。评分越低,疼痛越轻。3个研究以SF-MPQ中的VAS评分作为有效性指标。其中1篇[7]没有具体数据,仅有变化值。另外2个研究异质性检验结果显示各研究间不具有异质性(P=0.38,I2=0%),故采用固定效应模型。Meta分析结果显示,2 组之间在VAS评分方面比较差异有统计学意义[WMD=-13.44,95%CI( -17.72,-9.16),P<0.01]。见图4。

图4 普瑞巴林与安慰药VAS评分比较的Meta分析

2.2.5 患者总体印象变化 3个研究比较了普瑞巴林与安慰药治疗PHN的PGIC,异质性检验结果显示各研究间存在明显异质性(P=0.004,I2=71%),故采用随机效应模型。Meta分析结果显示,2组之间在PGIC方面比较差异有统计学意义[RR=1.77,95%CI(1.43,2.18),P<0.01]。亚组分析显示,普瑞巴林150与300 mg·d-1间均无异质性(P=0.65,I2=0%),(P=0.52,I2=0%); 150~600 mg·d-1存在明显异质性(P=0.01,I2=85%)。与安慰药组比较,普瑞巴林3个剂量组均差异有统计学意义(P<0.01),见图5。

图5 普瑞巴林与安慰药PGIC比较的Meta分析

2.2.6 不良反应发生率 4个研究比较了普瑞巴林与安慰药治疗PHN不良反应发生率,发生较多的不良反应主要包括眩晕、嗜睡、头痛、外周水肿以及口干。分析结果显示,2 组之间不良反应发生率差异有统计学意义[RR=2.48,95%CI(2.00,3.07),P<0.01]。

2.3 普瑞巴林与阿米替林

纳入2项研究,共80例患者。2项研究的药物日剂量和疗程均一致(普瑞巴林150 mg·d-1、阿米替林25 mg·d-1,疗程8周)。研究结果显示,在有效性方面,普瑞巴林的反应有效率(疼痛缓解≥75%)较阿米替林高,2组之间疗效差异有统计学意义[RR=4.00,95%CI(1.84,8.72),P<0.01];在安全性方面,普瑞巴林不良反应发生率较阿米替林低,主要不良反应包括口干、眩晕、嗜睡,均表现为轻微或中度,可耐受。

2.4 普瑞巴林与5%利多卡因药膏

仅纳入1项研究,98例患者。普瑞巴林日剂量第1周150 mg,第2周300 mg,第3周开始600 mg,疗程4周。5%利多卡因膏,每12 h在疼痛最甚处给予2或3块药膏,疗程4周。研究结果显示,在有效性方面,普瑞巴林反应有效率较利多卡因低(65.0% vs 82.1%),SF-MPQ中VAS评分改变低于利多卡因(-17.2±25.57 vs -25.9±23.14);在安全性方面,普瑞巴林不良反应发生率较利多卡因高(42.9% vs 28.0%),主要不良反应包括眩晕、疲乏、嗜睡和头痛,均可耐受。

3 讨论
3.1 普瑞巴林的疗效与安全性

本研究结果显示,与安慰药比较较,普瑞巴林治疗PHN的疗效显著,常见不良反应包括眩晕、嗜睡、头痛、口干和外周水肿,均为轻到中度,可耐受。另外,与阿米替林比较,普瑞巴林疗效较好,不良反应发生率低。普瑞巴林疗效不及5%利多卡因药膏,不良反应发生率较5%利多卡因药膏高。但该结论仅来自一个小样本的临床研究,因此利多卡因药膏对PHN的疗效还需要更多临床试验证实。另外,近年国内回顾性研究结果显示,普瑞巴林与其他药物比较能更快、更持久缓解PHN,不良反应轻且为一过性,患者耐受性好[12-13]

3.2 本系统评价的局限性

本系统评价具有一定的局限性:①所纳入的研究均为国外文献,缺乏国内相关文献,不能完全反映普瑞巴林在国内的研究状况。这主要是因为国内研究的样本量小、质量低,未被纳入,因此有必要在国内开展高水平、大规模的RCT。②各研究对象的年龄、病程、药物剂量、疗程及随访时间有一定的差异,可能会对最终的研究结果造成一定的影响。③纳入的7个研究中,4个为安慰药对照研究,与阳性药物的对照研究较少,缺乏在临床用药更有利的疗效证据。④本系统评价无法获得更多阴性结果的数据,由于检索数据库有限,本研究只选用英文和中文文献,且所纳入的文献均为公开发表的文献,故存在发表偏倚的可能性较大。

3.3 对未来研究的启示

查阅关于普瑞巴林治疗PHN的研究,仅发现1个研究[5]采用生活质量评定简明健康测量量表(SF-36,包含4个生理健康评价、4个心理健康评价,共8个维度)对生活质量进行了评分。因此,建议在进行PHN患者疗效观察时增加SF-36这个结局指标。

综上所述,普瑞巴林能够有效治疗PHN,无严重不良反应,具有较好的疗效和安全性。但因纳入研究的质量不高,数量有限,上述结论尚需开展更多高质量、大样本、设计严格的RCT进行验证。

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

参考文献

[1] PHILIP A, THAKUR R.Post herpetic neuralgia[J]. J Palliat Med,2011,14(6): 765-773.
[本文引用:1]
[2] 神经病理性疼痛诊疗专家组. 神经病理性疼痛诊疗专家共识[J]. 中国疼痛医学杂志,2013,19(12): 705-710.
一、定义及分类 国际疼痛学会(International Association for the Study of Pain,IASP)于1994年将神经病理性疼痛(Neuropathic Pain,NP)定义为:“由神经系统的原发损害或功能障碍所引发或导致的疼痛(Paininitiated or caused by a primary lesion or dysfunction in the nervous system).2008年,IASP神经病理性疼痛特别兴趣小组(NeuPSIG)将该定义更新为:“由躯体感觉系统的损害或疾病导致的疼痛”(neuropathic pain is defined as pain caused by a lesion or disease of the somatosensory system)[1].
[本文引用:1]
[3] ATTAL N, CRUCCU G, BARON R, et al.EFNS guidelines on the pharmacological treatment of neuropathic pain: 2010 revision[J]. Eur J Neurol, 2010, 17(9): 1113-e88.
URL    
[本文引用:1]
[4] 郑静怡, 童本定, 丁选胜, . 普瑞巴林治疗神经病理性疼痛的Meta分析[J]. 西北药学杂志, 2014, 29(6): 629-633.
目的:对普瑞巴林治疗神经病理性疼痛的有效性和安全性进行评价。方法计算机检索 PubMed 、The Cochrane Clinical Trials Register 、Elsevier 、Springer Link 、OVID 、John Wiley 、Google Scholar 、中国期刊全文数据库(CNKI)、万方数据知识平台,检索起始时间为从建库开始至2013年8月。收集关于普瑞巴林治疗神经病理性疼痛的随机对照试验。 以疼痛强度、疼痛对睡眠影响的程度、不良事件发生例数为评价指标。用 Rev Man 5.1软件进行数据分析。结果共纳入12项 RCTs(共2408人),研究质量均为 A 级或 B 级。与安慰剂组相比,普瑞巴林组疼痛度、疼痛对睡眠影响的程度均显著降低([SMD =-1.06,95% CI (-1.38,-0.73),P <0.00001],[SMD =-1.35,95% CI(-1.39,-1.31),P <0.00001]),但不良事件显著增加([OR =4,95% CI(2.08,7.68),P<0.00001])。嗜睡、眩晕、口干、水肿等是普瑞巴林常见不良反应,一般为轻到中度。结论普瑞巴林治疗神经病理性疼 痛的有效性和安全性较好。
[本文引用:1]
[5] DWORKIN R H, CORBIN A E, YOUNG J P, et al.Pregabalin for the treatment of postherpetic neuralgia: a randomized,placebo-controlled trial[J]. Neurology, 2003, 60(8): 1274-1283.
Abstract OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pregabalin in the treatment of postherpetic neuralgia (PHN). METHODS: The authors conducted a multicenter, parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 8-week, randomized clinical trial in PHN, defined as pain for 3 or more months following herpes zoster rash healing. Patients (n = 173) were randomized to treatment with pregabalin or placebo. Patients randomized to pregabalin received either 600 mg/day (creatinine clearance > 60 mL/min) or 300 mg/day (creatinine clearance 30 to 60 mL/min). The primary efficacy measure was the mean of the last seven daily pain ratings. Secondary endpoints included additional pain ratings, sleep interference, quality of life, mood, and patient and clinician ratings of global improvement. RESULTS: Pregabalin-treated patients had greater decreases in pain than patients treated with placebo (endpoint mean scores 3.60 vs 5.29, p = 0.0001). Pain was significantly reduced in the pregabalin-treated patients after the first full day of treatment and throughout the study, and significant improvement on the McGill Pain Questionnaire total, sensory, and affective pain scores was also found. The proportions of patients with >or=30% and >or=50% decreases in mean pain scores were greater in the pregabalin than in the placebo group (63% vs 25% and 50% vs 20%, p = 0.001). Sleep also improved in patients treated with pregabalin compared to placebo (p = 0.0001). Both patients and clinicians were more likely to report global improvement with pregabalin than placebo (p = 0.001). Given the maximal dosage studied, pregabalin had acceptable tolerability compared to placebo despite a greater incidence of side effects, which were generally mild to moderate in intensity. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of PHN with pregabalin is safe, efficacious in relieving pain and sleep interference, and associated with greater global improvement than treatment with placebo.
DOI:10.1212/01.WNL.0000055433.55136.55      PMID:12707429      URL    
[本文引用:2]
[6] SABATOWSKI R, GALVEZ R, CHERRY D A, et al.Pregabalin reduces pain and improves sleep and mood disturbances in patients with post-herpetic neuralgia: results of a randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trial[J]. Pain, 2004, 109(1-2): 26-35.
[本文引用:0]
[7] SEVENTER R V, FEISTER H A, YOUNG J P, et al.Efficacy and tolerability of twice-daily pregabalin for treating pain and related sleep interference in postherpetic neuralgia: a 13-week, randomized trial[J]. Curr Med Res Opin, 2006, 22(2): 375-384.
This trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of pregabalin dosed twice daily (BID) for relief of neuro-pathic pain associated with postherpetic neuralgia (PHN).The 13-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study randomized 370 patients with PHN to pregabalin (150, 300, or 600 mg/day BID) or placebo.Primary efficacy measure was endpoint mean pain score from daily pain diaries. Secondary efficacy measures included endpoint mean sleep-interference score from daily sleep diaries and Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC). Safety evaluations included adverse events (AEs), physical and neurologic examinations, 12-lead ECG, vital signs, and laboratory testing.Pregabalin provided significant, dose-proportional pain relief at endpoint: difference from placebo in mean pain score, 150 mg/day, -0.88, p = 0.0077; 300 mg/day, -1.07, p = 0.0016; 600 mg/day, -1.79, p = 0.0003. Weekly mean pain scores significantly improved as early as week 1. Sleep interference in all pregabalin groups was also significantly improved at endpoint, compared with placebo (p < 0.001), beginning at week 1 (p < 0.01). At study termination, patients in the 150 (p = 0.02) and 600 mg/day (p = 0.003) groups were more likely to report global improvement than were those in the placebo group. Most AEs were mild or moderate. Among pregabalin-treated patients, 13.5% withdrew due to AEs, most commonly for dizziness (16 patients, 5.8%), somnolence (8, 2.9%), or ataxia (7, 2.5%).Pregabalin, dosed BID, reduced neuropathic pain associated with PHN and was well tolerated. It also reduced the extent to which pain interfered with sleep. Pregabalin's effects were seen as early as week 1 and were sustained throughout the 13-week study.
DOI:10.1185/030079906X80404      PMID:16466610      URL    
[本文引用:1]
[8] STACEY B R, BARRETT J A, WHALEN E, et al.Pregabalin for postherpetic neuralgia: placebo-controlled trial of fixed and flexible dosing regimens on allodynia and time to onset of pain relief[J]. J Pain, 2008, 9(11): 1006-1017.
Abstract Unlabelled: Time to onset of pain relief and improvement in allodynia in 269 patients with postherpetic neuralgia was examined in a 4-week randomized trial comparing flexibly dosed pregabalin (150-600 mg/d), fixed-dose pregabalin (300 mg/d), and placebo. For each patient with clinically meaningful pain reduction (>or=30%) at end point, onset of pain relief was defined as the first study day on which a patient reported >or=1-point reduction in pain relative to baseline. Average dose achieved was 396 mg/d in the flexible-dose group compared with 295 mg/d in the fixed-dose group. Median pain relief onset times were 3.5 days (flexible-dose), 1.5 days (fixed-dose), and >4 weeks (placebo). Compared with placebo, significantly more patients in both pregabalin treatment groups achieved >or=30% and >or=50% pain reduction at end point. Almost 95% of patients had brush-evoked allodynia, with 68% having moderate to severe allodynia (>or=40/100 mm). At baseline, pain and allodynia were highly correlated. Independent of treatment assignment, improvement in pain and improvement in allodynia were significantly correlated. Allodynia could serve as a useful surrogate outcome measure in future studies. Pregabalin was significantly better than placebo in alleviating allodynia (flexible-dose reduction, 26 mm; fixed-dose, 21 mm; placebo, 12 mm). Discontinuation rates due to adverse events were more frequent in the fixed-dose group. Perspective: A flexible-dose regimen reduces discontinuations, facilitates higher final doses, and results in a slightly greater pain relief. Allodynia (touch-evoked pain) can be of disabling severity and is present in nearly all patients with postherpetic neuralgia. Allodynia severity is correlated with pain severity and improvement in allodynia is correlated with clinical response.
DOI:10.1016/j.jpain.2008.05.014      PMID:18640074      URL    
[本文引用:0]
[9] ACHAR A, CHATTERIEE G, RAY T G, et al.Comparative study of clinical efficacy with amitriptyline, pregabalin, and amitriptyline plus pregabalin combination in postherpetic neuralgia[J]. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol, 2010, 76(1): 63-65.
The most common and most intractable sequel of herpes zoster is postherpetic neuralgia (PHN). There is no universally accepted definition of postherpetic neuralgia. The duration of PHN was evaluated by using two definitions: Pain that persisted after healing of rash and pain that persisted for more than 30 days from the time of enrollment. Some authors also described PHN as pain persisting for at least three months after healing of rash. The overall incidence of PHN is 8 to 15%, using the first two definitions. Patients of age 50 years or older had a 14.7-fold higher prevalence of pain, 30 days after onset of rash, than patients younger than 50 years of age. PHN is thought to be due to nerve damage caused by the varicella virus.
DOI:10.4103/0378-6323.58686      PMID:20061738      URL    
[本文引用:0]
[10] ACHAR A, CHAKRABORTY P P, BISAI S, et al.Comparative study of clinical efficacy of amitriptyline and pregabalin in postherpetic neuralgia[J]. Acta Dermatovenerol Croat, 2012, 20(2): 89-94.
SUMMARY The most common complication of herpes zoster in immunocompetentpatients is postherpetic neuralgia, which is very difficult to treat. Significantbeneficial effects have been found for amitriptyline, gabapentin, pregabalin,carbamazepine, sodium valproate, oxycodone, corticosteroid, topical capsaicin,tramadol, etc. The aim of this open randomized comparative study was to demonstrateclinical efficacy of amitriptyline and pregabalin. The study included 50patients, 32 (64%) male and 18 (36%) female, randomized to receive either amitriptylineor pregabalin (n=25 each). Amitriptyline was administered in a dose of25 mg once daily and pregabalin in a dose of 75 mg twice daily. Inclusion criteriawere as follows: postherpetic neuralgia of more than 1 month duration; pain ofat least moderate severity; and patient age 40 years or older and no pregnancy.Patients with a history of any serious diseases (renal, cardiac, hepatic or seizure)were excluded. Total treatment period spanned 8 weeks, with patient follow upvisits at 2, 4 and 8 weeks to assess the degree of improvement in pain perceptionand any adverse reaction. Patients with four herpes zoster types were included inthis study, of which thoracic type predominated (54%). Other types were cervicalin 12 (24%), trigeminal in 8 (16%) and lumbosacral in 3 (6%) patients. Prodromalsymptoms before herpes zoster were reported by 66% of study patients. Satisfactoryimprovements of pain perception at the end of 8 weeks (>75%) were noticedin pregabalin group, which was statistically significant (2=10.08; P<0.05).Dry mouth was the commonest complication in amitriptyline group and dizzinessin pregabalin group. More importantly, none of the patients stopped treatmentdue to adverse reaction. In conclusion, therapy with pregabalin is bettercompared to amitriptyline in postherpetic neuralgia patients. However, a similarstudy in a larger sample is required to validate the present findings.
DOI:10.1159/000341990      PMID:22726281      URL    
[本文引用:0]
[11] REHM S, BINDER A, BARON R.Post-herpetic neuralgia: 5% lidocaine medicated plaster,pregabalin,or a combination of both? A randomized,open,clinical effectiveness study[J]. Curr Med Res Opin, 2010, 26(7): 1607-1619.
[本文引用:1]
[12] 郭志毅, 黄盛辉, 敖兴亮, . 普瑞巴林与加巴喷丁治疗带状疱疹后期神经痛[J]. 西北药学杂志, 2015, 30(3): 299-301.
目的探讨在治疗带状疱疹后期神经痛(PHN)时,普瑞巴林与加巴喷丁的临床效果。方法随机选取2012年8月至2014年2月于我院接受治疗的带状疱疹后期神经痛(PHN)患者80例,随机分2组,对照组采用加巴喷丁,观察组采用普瑞巴林,2组施予相同的护理方法,比较2组患者的疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS评分)和治疗效果。结果 2组患者病情均有明显好转(P〈0.05),但2组之间没有明显差异(P〉0.05),观察组的镇痛时间稍快于对照组,不良反应发生率少于对照组,临床疗效优于对照组,数据具有明显差异(P〈0.05)。结论普瑞巴林在治疗PHN时,既能快速有效地达到镇痛效果,又能在一定程度上减少不良反应的发生,临床效果明显优于加巴喷丁。
[本文引用:1]
[13] 李京霞,汤芹芹,刘东,. 加巴喷丁与普瑞巴林治疗带状疱疹后神经痛的效果比较[J]. 实用医院临床杂志, 2012, 9(4): 150-152.
目的 观察加巴喷丁和普瑞巴林治疗带状疱疹后神经痛(post-herpetic neuralgia,PHN)的效果以及对患者睡眠的影响.方法 60例PHN患者按随机数字表法分为加巴喷丁组和普瑞巴林组各30例,分别给予加巴喷丁900 mg/d口服和普瑞巴林150 mg/d口服,疗程均为28天.观察治疗前后疼痛和睡眠的改善情况及药物不良反应.结果 两组患者治疗后名时点与治疗前相比疼痛评分随时间下降,睡眠时间增加(P0.05).结论 普瑞巴林治疗PHN更安全有效,优于加巴喷丁.
[本文引用:1]
资源
PDF下载数    
RichHTML 浏览数    
摘要点击数    

分享
导出

相关文章:
关键词(key words)
普瑞巴林
神经痛
带状疱疹
随机对照试验
Meta分析
系统评价


作者
罗宏丽
肖顺林
王海雪