Ketamine and other NMDA receptor antagonists for chronic pain.

IF 8.8 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Michael C Ferraro, Aidan G Cashin, Eric J Visser, Christina Abdel Shaheed, Michael A Wewege, Benedict M Wand, Sylvia M Gustin, Neil E O'Connell, James H McAuley
{"title":"Ketamine and other NMDA receptor antagonists for chronic pain.","authors":"Michael C Ferraro, Aidan G Cashin, Eric J Visser, Christina Abdel Shaheed, Michael A Wewege, Benedict M Wand, Sylvia M Gustin, Neil E O'Connell, James H McAuley","doi":"10.1002/14651858.CD015373.pub2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Rationale: </strong>N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists are a group of medicines classed according to their mechanism of action. Ketamine and other NMDA receptor antagonists are used to treat chronic pain, despite uncertain benefits and harms.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the benefits and harms of ketamine and other NDMA receptor antagonists compared to placebo, usual care, or other medicines for adults with chronic non-cancer, non-headache pain.</p><p><strong>Search methods: </strong>We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and three trial registries (with reference checking, citation searching, and contact with study authors/experts) to identify included studies. The last search was 3 June 2025.</p><p><strong>Eligibility criteria: </strong>We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with chronic pain (≥ 3 months' duration), evaluating ketamine, memantine, dextromethorphan, amantadine, or magnesium versus placebo, usual care, or another medicine. We excluded studies of cancer or headache pain.</p><p><strong>Outcomes: </strong>Critical outcomes were pain intensity and adverse events. Important outcomes were disability, depressive symptoms, health-related quality of life, tolerability, and opioid consumption. For adverse events and tolerability, follow-up was until the end of treatment. For all other outcomes, we were interested in treatment effects in the immediate term (48 hours-1 week), short term (> 1 week-3 months), medium term (> 3 months-6 months), and long term (> 6 months).</p><p><strong>Risk of bias: </strong>We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for RCTs (RoB 2).</p><p><strong>Synthesis methods: </strong>We converted all continuous pain intensity scores to a 0-to-100 scale (0 = no pain; 100 = worst pain). We synthesised results using random-effects meta-analysis where possible, reporting mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes, each with its 95% confidence interval (CI). We assessed the certainty of evidence with GRADE.</p><p><strong>Included studies: </strong>We found 67 RCTs (2309 participants): 30 parallel-group RCTs (1568 participants) and 37 cross-over RCTs (741 participants). Most studies (96%) were from high-income countries. Female participation ranged from 11% to 100%. The interventions were ketamine (39 studies), memantine (10 studies), dextromethorphan (9 studies), amantadine (3 studies), and magnesium (8 studies). Sixty-two studies used placebo comparators. Our quantitative synthesis included 28 studies.</p><p><strong>Synthesis of results: </strong>Results are presented for pain intensity (continuous measures, at reported time points) and total adverse events. Ketamine Intravenous ketamine versus placebo There is no clear evidence that intravenous ketamine reduces pain intensity in the immediate term (MD -15.79, 95% CI -32.09 to 0.51; 3 studies, 173 participants; very low certainty), short term (MD -5.32, 95% CI -15.51 to 4.87; 4 studies, 114 participants; low certainty), or medium term (MD -8.70, 95% CI -31.05 to 13.65; 1 study, 19 participants; very low certainty). Intravenous ketamine may increase the risk of adverse events (RR 3.26, 95% CI 1.05 to 10.09; 4 studies, 140 participants; low certainty). Oral ketamine versus placebo There is no clear evidence that oral ketamine reduces pain intensity in the immediate term (MD -2.64, 95% CI -13.42 to 8.14; 2 studies, 46 participants; low certainty) or short term (MD -9.80, 95% CI -23.55 to 3.95; 2 studies, 40 participants; low certainty). No studies reported total adverse events. Topical ketamine versus placebo There is no clear evidence that topical ketamine reduces pain intensity in the immediate term (MD 1.90, 95% CI -18.73 to 22.53; 1 study, 47 participants; very low certainty) or short term (MD 2.82, 95% CI -14.49 to 20.12; 2 studies, 64 participants; low certainty). There is no clear evidence that topical ketamine increases the risk of adverse events (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.73; 1 study, 47 participants; low certainty). Memantine Oral memantine versus placebo There is no clear evidence that oral memantine reduces pain intensity in the immediate term (MD 4.00, 95% CI -9.93 to 17.93; 1 study, 36 participants; very low certainty), short term (MD -8.69, 95% CI -19.40 to 2.02; 6 studies, 217 participants; very low certainty), or medium term (MD -1.74, 95% CI -43.18 to 39.70; 2 studies, 101 participants; very low certainty). There is no clear evidence that oral memantine increases the risk of adverse events (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.56; 3 studies, 100 participants; low certainty). Dextromethorphan Oral dextromethorphan versus placebo The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of oral dextromethorphan on pain intensity in the short term (MD -9.00, 95% CI -22.86 to 4.86; 1 study, 40 participants; very low certainty). The evidence is very uncertain about the risk of adverse events with oral dextromethorphan (RR 1.80, 95% CI 0.73 to 4.43; 1 study, 40 participants; very low certainty). Amantadine Oral amantadine versus placebo The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of oral amantadine on pain intensity in the immediate term (MD 6.00, 95% CI -12.45 to 24.45; 1 study, 26 participants; very low certainty). The evidence is very uncertain about the risk of adverse events with oral amantadine (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.14 to 5.20; 1 study, 26 participants; very low certainty). Magnesium Intravenous magnesium versus placebo There is no clear evidence that intravenous magnesium reduces pain intensity in the immediate term (MD -2.00, 95% CI -14.43 to 10.43; 1 study, 55 participants; low certainty) and short term (MD -3.47, 95% CI -15.25 to 8.31; 2 studies, 82 participants; low certainty). The evidence is very uncertain about the risk of adverse events with intravenous magnesium (0/35 events in intravenous magnesium group versus 0/35 in placebo group; 1 study, 70 participants; very low certainty). Oral magnesium versus placebo There is no clear evidence that oral magnesium reduces pain intensity in the short term (MD -0.55, 95% CI -8.32 to 7.21; 2 studies, 118 participants; low certainty). No studies reported total adverse events.</p><p><strong>Authors' conclusions: </strong>Limited low- to very low-certainty evidence limits conclusions about the effects of ketamine, memantine, dextromethorphan, amantadine, and magnesium on pain intensity. Intravenous ketamine may increase the risk of adverse events, but the harms of ketamine and other NMDA receptor antagonists are generally unclear. Adequately powered RCTs are needed to determine the benefits and harms of ketamine and other NMDA receptor antagonists for chronic pain.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>No dedicated funding.</p><p><strong>Registration: </strong>Protocol available: doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD015373.</p>","PeriodicalId":10473,"journal":{"name":"Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews","volume":"8 ","pages":"CD015373"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12358209/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD015373.pub2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Rationale: N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists are a group of medicines classed according to their mechanism of action. Ketamine and other NMDA receptor antagonists are used to treat chronic pain, despite uncertain benefits and harms.

Objectives: To evaluate the benefits and harms of ketamine and other NDMA receptor antagonists compared to placebo, usual care, or other medicines for adults with chronic non-cancer, non-headache pain.

Search methods: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and three trial registries (with reference checking, citation searching, and contact with study authors/experts) to identify included studies. The last search was 3 June 2025.

Eligibility criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with chronic pain (≥ 3 months' duration), evaluating ketamine, memantine, dextromethorphan, amantadine, or magnesium versus placebo, usual care, or another medicine. We excluded studies of cancer or headache pain.

Outcomes: Critical outcomes were pain intensity and adverse events. Important outcomes were disability, depressive symptoms, health-related quality of life, tolerability, and opioid consumption. For adverse events and tolerability, follow-up was until the end of treatment. For all other outcomes, we were interested in treatment effects in the immediate term (48 hours-1 week), short term (> 1 week-3 months), medium term (> 3 months-6 months), and long term (> 6 months).

Risk of bias: We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for RCTs (RoB 2).

Synthesis methods: We converted all continuous pain intensity scores to a 0-to-100 scale (0 = no pain; 100 = worst pain). We synthesised results using random-effects meta-analysis where possible, reporting mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes, each with its 95% confidence interval (CI). We assessed the certainty of evidence with GRADE.

Included studies: We found 67 RCTs (2309 participants): 30 parallel-group RCTs (1568 participants) and 37 cross-over RCTs (741 participants). Most studies (96%) were from high-income countries. Female participation ranged from 11% to 100%. The interventions were ketamine (39 studies), memantine (10 studies), dextromethorphan (9 studies), amantadine (3 studies), and magnesium (8 studies). Sixty-two studies used placebo comparators. Our quantitative synthesis included 28 studies.

Synthesis of results: Results are presented for pain intensity (continuous measures, at reported time points) and total adverse events. Ketamine Intravenous ketamine versus placebo There is no clear evidence that intravenous ketamine reduces pain intensity in the immediate term (MD -15.79, 95% CI -32.09 to 0.51; 3 studies, 173 participants; very low certainty), short term (MD -5.32, 95% CI -15.51 to 4.87; 4 studies, 114 participants; low certainty), or medium term (MD -8.70, 95% CI -31.05 to 13.65; 1 study, 19 participants; very low certainty). Intravenous ketamine may increase the risk of adverse events (RR 3.26, 95% CI 1.05 to 10.09; 4 studies, 140 participants; low certainty). Oral ketamine versus placebo There is no clear evidence that oral ketamine reduces pain intensity in the immediate term (MD -2.64, 95% CI -13.42 to 8.14; 2 studies, 46 participants; low certainty) or short term (MD -9.80, 95% CI -23.55 to 3.95; 2 studies, 40 participants; low certainty). No studies reported total adverse events. Topical ketamine versus placebo There is no clear evidence that topical ketamine reduces pain intensity in the immediate term (MD 1.90, 95% CI -18.73 to 22.53; 1 study, 47 participants; very low certainty) or short term (MD 2.82, 95% CI -14.49 to 20.12; 2 studies, 64 participants; low certainty). There is no clear evidence that topical ketamine increases the risk of adverse events (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.73; 1 study, 47 participants; low certainty). Memantine Oral memantine versus placebo There is no clear evidence that oral memantine reduces pain intensity in the immediate term (MD 4.00, 95% CI -9.93 to 17.93; 1 study, 36 participants; very low certainty), short term (MD -8.69, 95% CI -19.40 to 2.02; 6 studies, 217 participants; very low certainty), or medium term (MD -1.74, 95% CI -43.18 to 39.70; 2 studies, 101 participants; very low certainty). There is no clear evidence that oral memantine increases the risk of adverse events (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.56; 3 studies, 100 participants; low certainty). Dextromethorphan Oral dextromethorphan versus placebo The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of oral dextromethorphan on pain intensity in the short term (MD -9.00, 95% CI -22.86 to 4.86; 1 study, 40 participants; very low certainty). The evidence is very uncertain about the risk of adverse events with oral dextromethorphan (RR 1.80, 95% CI 0.73 to 4.43; 1 study, 40 participants; very low certainty). Amantadine Oral amantadine versus placebo The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of oral amantadine on pain intensity in the immediate term (MD 6.00, 95% CI -12.45 to 24.45; 1 study, 26 participants; very low certainty). The evidence is very uncertain about the risk of adverse events with oral amantadine (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.14 to 5.20; 1 study, 26 participants; very low certainty). Magnesium Intravenous magnesium versus placebo There is no clear evidence that intravenous magnesium reduces pain intensity in the immediate term (MD -2.00, 95% CI -14.43 to 10.43; 1 study, 55 participants; low certainty) and short term (MD -3.47, 95% CI -15.25 to 8.31; 2 studies, 82 participants; low certainty). The evidence is very uncertain about the risk of adverse events with intravenous magnesium (0/35 events in intravenous magnesium group versus 0/35 in placebo group; 1 study, 70 participants; very low certainty). Oral magnesium versus placebo There is no clear evidence that oral magnesium reduces pain intensity in the short term (MD -0.55, 95% CI -8.32 to 7.21; 2 studies, 118 participants; low certainty). No studies reported total adverse events.

Authors' conclusions: Limited low- to very low-certainty evidence limits conclusions about the effects of ketamine, memantine, dextromethorphan, amantadine, and magnesium on pain intensity. Intravenous ketamine may increase the risk of adverse events, but the harms of ketamine and other NMDA receptor antagonists are generally unclear. Adequately powered RCTs are needed to determine the benefits and harms of ketamine and other NMDA receptor antagonists for chronic pain.

Funding: No dedicated funding.

Registration: Protocol available: doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD015373.

氯胺酮和其他NMDA受体拮抗剂治疗慢性疼痛。
原理:n -甲基- d -天冬氨酸(NMDA)受体拮抗剂是根据其作用机制分类的一组药物。氯胺酮和其他NMDA受体拮抗剂被用于治疗慢性疼痛,尽管益处和危害不确定。目的:评估氯胺酮和其他NDMA受体拮抗剂与安慰剂、常规护理或其他药物相比,对慢性非癌症、非头痛的成人患者的益处和危害。检索方法:我们检索了CENTRAL、MEDLINE、Embase和三个试验注册中心(通过参考文献检查、引文检索和与研究作者/专家联系)来确定纳入的研究。最后一次搜索是在2025年6月3日。入选标准:我们纳入了慢性疼痛(持续时间≥3个月)的成人随机对照试验(RCTs),评估氯胺酮、美金刚、右美沙芬、金刚烷胺或镁与安慰剂、常规护理或其他药物的对比。我们排除了癌症和头痛的研究。结局:关键结局是疼痛强度和不良事件。重要的结局是残疾、抑郁症状、健康相关生活质量、耐受性和阿片类药物的使用。对于不良事件和耐受性,随访至治疗结束。对于所有其他结果,我们感兴趣的是近期(48小时-1周)、短期(> 1周-3个月)、中期(> 3个月-6个月)和长期(> 6个月)的治疗效果。偏倚风险:我们使用Cochrane rct偏倚风险工具评估偏倚风险(RoB 2)。综合方法:我们将所有连续疼痛强度评分转换为0- 100分(0 =无疼痛;100 =最严重疼痛)。我们尽可能使用随机效应荟萃分析综合结果,报告连续结局的平均差异(MDs)和二分类结局的风险比(rr),每个结果都有95%的置信区间(CI)。我们用GRADE评估证据的确定性。纳入的研究:我们发现67项随机对照试验(2309名受试者):30项平行组随机对照试验(1568名受试者)和37项交叉随机对照试验(741名受试者)。大多数研究(96%)来自高收入国家。女性的参与率从11%到100%不等。干预措施为氯胺酮(39项研究)、美金刚(10项研究)、右美沙芬(9项研究)、金刚烷胺(3项研究)和镁(8项研究)。62项研究使用安慰剂比较。我们的定量综合包括28项研究。结果综合:给出了疼痛强度(连续测量,在报告的时间点)和总不良事件的结果。没有明确的证据表明静脉注射氯胺酮可在近期(MD -15.79, 95% CI -32.09至0.51;3项研究,173名受试者;极低确定性)、短期(MD -5.32, 95% CI -15.51至4.87;4项研究,114名受试者;低确定性)或中期(MD -8.70, 95% CI -31.05至13.65;1项研究,19名受试者;极低确定性)减轻疼痛强度。静脉注射氯胺酮可能增加不良事件的风险(RR 3.26, 95% CI 1.05 - 10.09; 4项研究,140名受试者;低确定性)。口服氯胺酮与安慰剂没有明确的证据表明口服氯胺酮在短期内(MD -2.64, 95% CI -13.42至8.14;2项研究,46名受试者;低确定性)或短期内(MD -9.80, 95% CI -23.55至3.95;2项研究,40名受试者;低确定性)减轻疼痛强度。没有研究报告总的不良事件。局部氯胺酮与安慰剂没有明确的证据表明局部氯胺酮能在短期内(MD为1.90,95% CI为-18.73至22.53;1项研究,47名受试者;极低确定性)或短期内(MD为2.82,95% CI为-14.49至20.12;2项研究,64名受试者;低确定性)减轻疼痛强度。没有明确的证据表明局部氯胺酮会增加不良事件的风险(RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.47 - 2.73; 1项研究,47名受试者;低确定性)。没有明确的证据表明口服美金刚能在近期(MD 4.00, 95% CI -9.93 - 17.93; 1项研究,36名受试者;极低确定性)、短期(MD -8.69, 95% CI -19.40 - 2.02; 6项研究,217名受试者;极低确定性)或中期(MD -1.74, 95% CI -43.18 - 39.70; 2项研究,101名受试者;极低确定性)减轻疼痛强度。没有明确的证据表明口服美金刚会增加不良事件的风险(RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.76 - 1.56; 3项研究,100名受试者;低确定性)。关于口服右美沙芬对短期疼痛强度的影响,证据非常不确定(MD -9.00, 95% CI -22.86 - 4.86; 1项研究,40名参与者;非常低的确定性)。关于口服右美沙芬不良事件的风险,证据非常不确定(RR 1.80, 95% CI 0.73 - 4.43; 1项研究,40名受试者;非常低的确定性)。 口服金刚烷胺与安慰剂口服金刚烷胺对近期疼痛强度的影响的证据非常不确定(MD为6.00,95% CI为-12.45至24.45;1项研究,26名参与者;非常低的确定性)。关于口服金刚烷胺不良事件风险的证据非常不确定(RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.14至5.20;1项研究,26名受试者;非常低的确定性)。没有明确的证据表明静脉注射镁可以减轻近期疼痛强度(MD -2.00, 95% CI -14.43至10.43;1项研究,55名受试者;低确定性)和短期疼痛强度(MD -3.47, 95% CI -15.25至8.31;2项研究,82名受试者;低确定性)。关于静脉注射镁的不良事件风险的证据非常不确定(静脉注射镁组的不良事件为0/35,安慰剂组为0/35;1项研究,70名参与者;非常低的确定性)。口服镁与安慰剂没有明确的证据表明口服镁能在短期内减轻疼痛强度(MD -0.55, 95% CI -8.32 - 7.21; 2项研究,118名受试者;低确定性)。没有研究报告总的不良事件。作者的结论:有限的低到非常低确定性的证据限制了氯胺酮、美金刚、右美沙芬、金刚烷胺和镁对疼痛强度的影响。静脉注射氯胺酮可能增加不良事件的风险,但氯胺酮和其他NMDA受体拮抗剂的危害一般尚不清楚。需要足够的随机对照试验来确定氯胺酮和其他NMDA受体拮抗剂对慢性疼痛的益处和危害。资金:没有专门的资金。注册:可用协议:doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD015373。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.60
自引率
2.40%
发文量
173
审稿时长
1-2 weeks
期刊介绍: The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) stands as the premier database for systematic reviews in healthcare. It comprises Cochrane Reviews, along with protocols for these reviews, editorials, and supplements. Owned and operated by Cochrane, a worldwide independent network of healthcare stakeholders, the CDSR (ISSN 1469-493X) encompasses a broad spectrum of health-related topics, including health services.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信