Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Neurostimulation for Painful Diabetic Neuropathy

Author:

Duarte Rui V.1ORCID,Nevitt Sarah1,Copley Sue2,Maden Michelle1,de Vos Cecile C.34,Taylor Rod S.56,Eldabe Sam2

Affiliation:

1. 1Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, U.K

2. 2Department of Pain Medicine, The James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, U.K

3. 3Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands

4. 4Centre for Pain Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands

5. 5MRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit and Robertson Centre for Biostatistics, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, U.K

6. 6College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, U.K

Abstract

BACKGROUND Different waveforms of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) have now been evaluated for the management of painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN). However, no direct or indirect comparison between SCS waveforms has been performed to date. PURPOSE To conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of SCS for PDN. DATA SOURCES MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Embase, and WikiStim were searched from inception until December 2021. STUDY SELECTION Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of SCS for PDN were included. DATA EXTRACTION Pain intensity, proportion of patients achieving at least a 50% reduction in pain intensity, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) data were extracted. DATA SYNTHESIS Significant reductions in pain intensity were observed for low-frequency SCS (LF-SCS) (mean difference [MD] −3.13 [95% CI −4.19 to −2.08], moderate certainty) and high-frequency SCS (HF-SCS) (MD −5.20 [95% CI −5.77 to −4.63], moderate certainty) compared with conventional medical management (CMM) alone. There was a significantly greater reduction in pain intensity on HF-SCS compared with LF-SCS (MD −2.07 [95% CI −3.26 to −0.87], moderate certainty). Significant differences were observed for LF-SCS and HF-SCS compared with CMM for the outcomes proportion of patients with at least 50% pain reduction and HRQoL (very low to moderate certainty). No significant differences were observed between LF-SCS and HF-SCS (very low to moderate certainty). LIMITATIONS Limited number of RCTs and no head-to-head RCTs conducted. CONCLUSIONS Our findings confirm the pain relief and HRQoL benefits of the addition of SCS to CMM for patients with PDN. However, in the absence of head-to-head RCT evidence, the relative benefits of HF-SCS compared with LF-SCS for patients with PDN remain uncertain.

Publisher

American Diabetes Association

Subject

Advanced and Specialized Nursing,Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism,Internal Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3