neuralgia

PURPOSE:

Painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN) is a variant of diabetic peripheral neuropathy which is highly prevalent and distressing in diabetic patients. Despite its high burden, the optimal treatment of PDN has remained a clinical challenge. To explain the emergence and maintenance of PDN, increasing attention has been focused on dimensions of inflammation and oxidative toxic stress (OTS). Accordingly, the aim of this study was to investigate the effects of oral N-acetylcysteine (NAC), an agent with known anti-oxidant and anti-inflammatory effects, as an adjunct therapy in patients suffering from PDN.

PATIENTS AND METHODS:

113 eligible patients with type 2 diabetes suffering from PDN were randomly assigned to either the pregabalin + placebo or pregabalin + NAC group for 8 weeks (pregabalin at a dose of 150 mg per day, NAC and matched placebo at doses of 600 mg twice a day). Mean pain score was evaluated at baseline, week 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8 of the study based on the mean 24 hr average pain score, using an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS). As secondary efficacy measures, mean sleep interference score (SIS) resulting from PDN, responder rates, Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC), Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC), and safety were also assessed. Additionally, serum levels of total antioxidant capacity (TAC), total thiol groups (TTG), catalase activity (CAT), glutathione peroxidase (GPx), superoxide dismutase (SOD), nitric oxide (NO), and malondialdehyde (MDA) were assessed at baseline and at the end of the study.

RESULTS:

Ninety patients completed the eight-week course of the study. The decrease in mean pain scores and mean sleep interference score in pregabalin + NAC group was greater in comparison with pregabalin + placebo group (p value<0.001 in both conditions). Moreover, more responders (defined as ≥50% reduction in mean pain score from baseline to end-point) were observed in the pregabalin + NAC group, in comparison with pregabalin + placebo group (72.1% vs 46.8%). More improvement in PGIC and CGIC from baseline to the end of the study was reported in pregabalin + NAC group. Oral NAC had minimal adverse effects and was well tolerated in almost all patients. Furthermore, in respect to OTS biomarkers, adjuvant NAC significantly decreased serum level of MDA and significantly increased serum levels of SOD, GPx, TAC, and TTG.

CONCLUSION:

The pattern of results suggests that compared to placebo and over a time period of 8 weeks, adjuvant NAC is more efficacious in improving neuropathic pain associated with diabetic neuropathy than placebo. Ameliorative effects of NAC on OTS biomarkers demonstrated that NAC may alleviate painful symptoms of diabetic neuropathy, at least in part by its antioxidant effects.

In vaccinating adults, clinicians face 2 types of challenges: (1) staying current on recommendations for influenza, pneumococcal, hepatitis A and B, zoster, and other vaccines and (2) addressing systemic barriers to implementing practices that increase vaccination rates. Although adult immunization rates remain suboptimal, there has been much good news in adult vaccination recently. New high-dose and adjuvanted influenza vaccines help improve immune response and may reduce influenza complications in older adults. The new recombinant zoster vaccine offers significantly more efficacy against zoster outbreaks and postherpetic neuralgia than zoster vaccine live. Pertussis vaccine given during the third trimester of pregnancy may prevent between 50% and 90% of pertussis infections in infants. Shorter time for completion (1 vs 6 months) of new, adjuvanted hepatitis B vaccine may increase adherence. Clinicians can address systemic barriers to increasing vaccination rates in their clinics and health care systems by following the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Standards for Adult Immunization Practice. Clinicians can help increase vaccination rates by writing standing orders and by advocating for nurses or medical assistants to receive training and protected time for assessing and documenting vaccination histories and administration. Strong recommendations that presume acceptance of vaccination are effective with most patients. Communication techniques similar to motivational interviewing can help with vaccine-hesitant patients. Clinicians, as experts on providing preventive services, can educate community leaders about the benefits of immunization and can inform vaccine experts about challenges of implementing vaccination recommendations in clinical practice and strategies that can work to raise vaccination rates. 

BACKGROUND:

Gabapentin is commonly used to treat neuropathic pain (pain due to nerve damage). This review updates a review published in 2014, and previous reviews published in 2011, 2005 and 2000.

OBJECTIVES:

To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of gabapentin in chronic neuropathic pain in adults.

SEARCH METHODS:

For this update we searched CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase for randomised controlled trials from January 2014 to January 2017. We also searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and reviews, and online clinical trials registries.

SELECTION CRITERIA:

We included randomised, double-blind trials of two weeks' duration or longer, comparing gabapentin (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 potential bias. Primary outcomes were participants with substantial pain relief (at least 50% pain relief over baseline or very much improved on Patient Global Impression of Change scale (PGIC)), or moderate pain relief (at least 30% pain relief over baseline or much or very much improved on PGIC). We performed a pooled analysis for any substantial or moderate benefit. Where pooled analysis was possible, we used dichotomous data to calculate risk ratio (RR) and number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNT) or harmful outcome (NNH). We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE and created 'Summary of findings' tables.

MAIN RESULTS:

We included four new studies (530 participants), and excluded three previously included studies (126 participants). In all, 37 studies provided information on 5914 participants. Most studies used oral gabapentin or gabapentin encarbil at doses of 1200 mg or more daily in different neuropathic pain conditions, predominantly postherpetic neuralgia and painful diabetic neuropathy. Study duration was typically four to 12 weeks. Not all studies reported important outcomes of interest. High risk of bias occurred mainly due to small size (especially in cross-over studies), and handling of data after study withdrawal.In postherpetic neuralgia, more participants (32%) had substantial benefit (at least 50% pain relief or PGIC very much improved) with gabapentin at 1200 mg daily or greater than with placebo (17%) (RR 1.8 (95% CI 1.5 to 2.1); NNT 6.7 (5.4 to 8.7); 8 studies, 2260 participants, moderate-quality evidence). More participants (46%) had moderate benefit (at least 30% pain relief or PGIC much or very much improved) with gabapentin at 1200 mg daily or greater than with placebo (25%) (RR 1.8 (95% CI 1.6 to 2.0); NNT 4.8 (4.1 to 6.0); 8 studies, 2260 participants, moderate-quality evidence).In painful diabetic neuropathy, more participants (38%) had substantial benefit (at least 50% pain relief or PGIC very much improved) with gabapentin at 1200 mg daily or greater than with placebo (21%) (RR 1.9 (95% CI 1.5 to 2.3); NNT 5.9 (4.6 to 8.3); 6 studies, 1277 participants, moderate-quality evidence). More participants (52%) had moderate benefit (at least 30% pain relief or PGIC much or very much improved) with gabapentin at 1200 mg daily or greater than with placebo (37%) (RR 1.4 (95% CI 1.3 to 1.6); NNT 6.6 (4.9 to 9.9); 7 studies, 1439 participants, moderate-quality evidence).For all conditions combined, adverse event withdrawals were more common with gabapentin (11%) than with placebo (8.2%) (RR 1.4 (95% CI 1.1 to 1.7); NNH 30 (20 to 65); 22 studies, 4346 participants, high-quality evidence). Serious adverse events were no more common with gabapentin (3.2%) than with placebo (2.8%) (RR 1.2 (95% CI 0.8 to 1.7); 19 studies, 3948 participants, moderate-quality evidence); there were eight deaths (very low-quality evidence). Participants experiencing at least one adverse event were more common with gabapentin (63%) than with placebo (49%) (RR 1.3 (95% CI 1.2 to 1.4); NNH 7.5 (6.1 to 9.6); 18 studies, 4279 participants, moderate-quality evidence). Individual adverse events occurred significantly more often with gabapentin. Participants taking gabapentin experienced dizziness (19%), somnolence (14%), peripheral oedema (7%), and gait disturbance (14%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:

Gabapentin at doses of 1800 mg to 3600 mg daily (1200 mg to 3600 mg gabapentin encarbil) can provide good levels of pain relief to some people with postherpetic neuralgia and peripheral diabetic neuropathy. Evidence for other types of neuropathic pain is very limited. The outcome of at least 50% pain intensity reduction is regarded as a useful outcome of treatment by patients, and the achievement of this degree of pain relief is associated with important beneficial effects on sleep interference, fatigue, and depression, as well as quality of life, function, and work. Around 3 or 4 out of 10 participants achieved this degree of pain relief with gabapentin, compared with 1 or 2 out of 10 for placebo. Over half of those treated with gabapentin will not have worthwhile pain relief but may experience adverse events. Conclusions have not changed since the previous update of this review.