Double-blind, randomized, controlled, crossover trial of pregabalin for neurogenic claudication

被引:34
|
作者
Markman, John D. [1 ]
Frazer, Maria E. [1 ]
Rast, Shirley A. [1 ]
McDermott, Michael P. [2 ,3 ]
Gewandter, Jennifer S. [4 ]
Chowdhry, Amit K. [2 ,3 ]
Czerniecka, Kate [1 ]
Pilcher, Webster H. [1 ]
Simon, Lee S. [5 ]
Dworkin, Robert H. [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Rochester, Sch Med & Dent, Dept Neurosurg, Translat Pain Res Program, Rochester, NY 14627 USA
[2] Univ Rochester, Sch Med & Dent, Dept Biostat & Computat Biol, Rochester, NY USA
[3] Univ Rochester, Sch Med & Dent, Dept Neurol, Rochester, NY 14642 USA
[4] Univ Rochester, Sch Med & Dent, Dept Anesthesiol, Rochester, NY USA
[5] SDG LLC, Cambridge, MA USA
关键词
LUMBAR SPINAL STENOSIS; POSTHERPETIC NEURALGIA; EXERCISE TREADMILL; FUNCTIONAL STATUS; PAIN; RELIABILITY; DISABILITY; MANAGEMENT; NEUROPATHY; EFFICACY;
D O I
10.1212/WNL.0000000000001168
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Objectives: To test the effects of pregabalin on the induction of neurogenic claudication. Methods: This study was a randomized, double-blind, active placebo-controlled, 2-period, crossover trial. Twenty-nine subjects were randomized to receive pregabalin followed by active placebo (i.e., diphenhydramine) or active placebo followed by pregabalin. Each treatment period lasted 10 days, including a 2-step titration. Periods were separated by a 10-day washout period, including a 3-day taper phase after the first period. The primary outcome variable was the time to first moderate pain symptom (Numeric Rating Scale score >= 4) during a 15-minute treadmill test (T-first). Secondary outcome measures included pain intensity at rest, pain intensity at the end of the treadmill test, distance walked, and validated self-report measures of pain and functional limitation including the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, modified Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form, Oswestry Disability Index, and Swiss Spinal Stenosis Questionnaire. Results: No significant difference was found between pregabalin and active placebo for the time to first moderate pain symptom (difference in median T-first = -1.08 [95% confidence interval -2.25 to 0.08], p = 0.61). In addition, none of the secondary outcome measures of pain or functional limitation were significantly improved by pregabalin compared with active placebo. Conclusions: Pregabalin was not more effective than active placebo in reducing painful symptoms or functional limitations in patients with neurogenic claudication associated with lumbar spinal stenosis. Classification of evidence: This study provides Class I evidence that for patients with neurogenic claudication, compared with diphenhydramine, pregabalin does not increase the time to moderate pain during a treadmill test.
引用
收藏
页码:265 / 272
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial of Famotidine in patients with functional dyspepsia
    Kato, Mototsugu
    Yoshida, Takeshi
    Hata, Tamotsu
    Ono, Yuji
    Ono, Shouko
    Nakagawa, Manabu
    Nakagawa, Souichi
    Shimizu, Yuichi
    Asaka, Masahiro
    GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2006, 130 (04) : A158 - A158
  • [42] Improvement of erectile function with Prelox: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial
    R Stanislavov
    V Nikolova
    P Rohdewald
    International Journal of Impotence Research, 2008, 20 : 173 - 180
  • [43] Effects of Acarbose on the Gut Microbiota of Prediabetic Patients: A Randomized, Double-blind, Controlled Crossover Trial
    Zhang, Xiuying
    Fang, Zhiwei
    Zhang, Chunfang
    Xia, Huihua
    Jie, Zhuye
    Han, Xueyao
    Chen, Yingli
    Ji, Linong
    DIABETES THERAPY, 2017, 8 (02) : 293 - 307
  • [44] Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial of famotidine in patients with functional dyspepsia
    Kato, M
    Watanabe, M
    Konishi, S
    Kudo, M
    Konno, J
    Meguro, T
    Kitamori, S
    Nakagawa, S
    Shimizu, Y
    Takeda, H
    Asaka, M
    ALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS, 2005, 21 : 27 - 31
  • [45] Improvement of erectile function with Prelox: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial
    Stanislavov, R.
    Nikolova, V.
    Rohdewald, P.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF IMPOTENCE RESEARCH, 2008, 20 (02) : 173 - 180
  • [46] Supplemental Dietary Nitrate for COPD: a Randomized, Double-blind, placebo-controlled, Crossover Trial
    Kerley, C. P.
    Cahill, K.
    Bolger, K.
    Fennell, K.
    O'Brien, A.
    McGowan, A.
    Burke, C.
    Faul, J. L.
    Cormican, L. J.
    IRISH JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2013, 182 : S440 - S440
  • [47] Sertraline to treat hot flashes: a randomized controlled, double-blind, crossover trial in a general population
    Gordon, Paul R.
    Kerwin, James P.
    Boesen, Kelly Green
    Senf, Janet
    MENOPAUSE-THE JOURNAL OF THE NORTH AMERICAN MENOPAUSE SOCIETY, 2006, 13 (04): : 568 - 575
  • [48] Tolcapone in Obsessive Compulsive Disorder: A Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Crossover Trial
    Grant, Jon
    Chamberlain, Samuel
    NEUROPSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY, 2021, 46 (SUPPL 1) : 312 - 313
  • [49] Effects of Acarbose on the Gut Microbiota of Prediabetic Patients: A Randomized, Double-blind, Controlled Crossover Trial
    Xiuying Zhang
    Zhiwei Fang
    Chunfang Zhang
    Huihua Xia
    Zhuye Jie
    Xueyao Han
    Yingli Chen
    Linong Ji
    Diabetes Therapy, 2017, 8 : 293 - 307
  • [50] Colchicine versus placebo in Behcet's disease: randomized, double-blind, controlled crossover trial
    Davatchi, Fereydoun
    Abdollahi, Bahar Sadeghi
    Banihashemi, Arash Tehrani
    Shahram, Farhad
    Nadji, Abdolhadi
    Shams, Hormoz
    Chams-Davatchi, Cheyda
    MODERN RHEUMATOLOGY, 2009, 19 (05) : 542 - 549