Tramadol versus placebo for chronic pain: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.

IF 7.6 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Jehad Ahmad Barakji, Mathias Maagaard, Johanne Juul Petersen, Yousef Ahmad Barakji, Emil Ørskov Ipsen, Christian Gluud, Ole Mathiesen, Janus Christian Jakobsen
{"title":"Tramadol versus placebo for chronic pain: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.","authors":"Jehad Ahmad Barakji, Mathias Maagaard, Johanne Juul Petersen, Yousef Ahmad Barakji, Emil Ørskov Ipsen, Christian Gluud, Ole Mathiesen, Janus Christian Jakobsen","doi":"10.1136/bmjebm-2025-114101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The objective of our study was to assess the benefits and harms of tramadol vs placebo in adults with chronic pain.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>The research method was a systematic review of randomised clinical trials with meta-analysis. The review followed the Trial Sequential Analysis and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index and BIOSIS were searched for trials published from inception to 6 February 2025.</p><p><strong>Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: </strong>Studies were eligible for inclusion if they were published and unpublished randomised clinical trials comparing tramadol vs placebo in adults with any type of chronic pain. Risk of bias was assessed according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>The main outcome measures were pain level, adverse events, quality of life, dependence, abuse and depressive symptoms.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 19 randomised placebo-controlled clinical trials enrolling 6506 participants. All outcome results were at high risk of bias. Meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis showed evidence of a beneficial effect of tramadol on chronic pain (mean difference numerical rating scale (NRS) -0.93 points; 97.5% CI -1.26 to -0.60; p<0.0001; low certainty of evidence). However, the effect size was below our predefined minimal important difference of 1.0 point on NRS. Beta binomial regression showed evidence of a harmful effect of tramadol on serious adverse events (OR 2.13; 97.5% CI 1.29 to 3.51; p=0.001; moderate certainty of evidence), mainly driven by a higher proportion of cardiac events and neoplasms. It was not possible to conduct a meta-analysis of the quality of life due to a lack of data. Meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis showed that tramadol increased the risk of several non-serious adverse events including nausea (number needed to harm (NNH) 7), dizziness (NNH 8), constipation (NNH 9), and somnolence (NNH 13) (all very low certainty of evidence).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Tramadol may have a slight effect on reducing chronic pain levels (low certainty of evidence) while likely increasing the risk of both serious (moderate certainty of evidence) and non-serious adverse events (very low certainty of evidence). The potential harms associated with tramadol use for pain management likely outweigh its limited benefits.</p>","PeriodicalId":9059,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2025-114101","RegionNum":3,"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

Objectives: The objective of our study was to assess the benefits and harms of tramadol vs placebo in adults with chronic pain.

Design: The research method was a systematic review of randomised clinical trials with meta-analysis. The review followed the Trial Sequential Analysis and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

Data sources: The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index and BIOSIS were searched for trials published from inception to 6 February 2025.

Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: Studies were eligible for inclusion if they were published and unpublished randomised clinical trials comparing tramadol vs placebo in adults with any type of chronic pain. Risk of bias was assessed according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.

Main outcome measures: The main outcome measures were pain level, adverse events, quality of life, dependence, abuse and depressive symptoms.

Results: We included 19 randomised placebo-controlled clinical trials enrolling 6506 participants. All outcome results were at high risk of bias. Meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis showed evidence of a beneficial effect of tramadol on chronic pain (mean difference numerical rating scale (NRS) -0.93 points; 97.5% CI -1.26 to -0.60; p<0.0001; low certainty of evidence). However, the effect size was below our predefined minimal important difference of 1.0 point on NRS. Beta binomial regression showed evidence of a harmful effect of tramadol on serious adverse events (OR 2.13; 97.5% CI 1.29 to 3.51; p=0.001; moderate certainty of evidence), mainly driven by a higher proportion of cardiac events and neoplasms. It was not possible to conduct a meta-analysis of the quality of life due to a lack of data. Meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis showed that tramadol increased the risk of several non-serious adverse events including nausea (number needed to harm (NNH) 7), dizziness (NNH 8), constipation (NNH 9), and somnolence (NNH 13) (all very low certainty of evidence).

Conclusion: Tramadol may have a slight effect on reducing chronic pain levels (low certainty of evidence) while likely increasing the risk of both serious (moderate certainty of evidence) and non-serious adverse events (very low certainty of evidence). The potential harms associated with tramadol use for pain management likely outweigh its limited benefits.

曲马多与安慰剂治疗慢性疼痛:荟萃分析和试验序列分析的系统综述。
目的:本研究的目的是评估曲马多与安慰剂在成人慢性疼痛患者中的益处和危害。设计:研究方法是采用随机临床试验的系统综述和荟萃分析。该综述采用试验序列分析和建议分级评估、发展和评价(GRADE)方法。数据来源:检索Cochrane Library、MEDLINE、Embase、Science Citation Index和BIOSIS,检索从开始到2025年2月6日发表的试验。入选研究的资格标准:已发表和未发表的比较曲马多与安慰剂对任何类型慢性疼痛的成人的随机临床试验均符合入选条件。偏倚风险根据Cochrane干预措施系统评价手册进行评估。主要结局指标:主要结局指标为疼痛程度、不良事件、生活质量、依赖性、滥用和抑郁症状。结果:我们纳入了19项随机安慰剂对照临床试验,纳入6506名受试者。所有结果均存在高偏倚风险。荟萃分析和试验序贯分析显示曲马多对慢性疼痛的有益作用(平均差异数值评定量表(NRS) -0.93分;97.5% CI -1.26至-0.60;结论:曲马多可能对降低慢性疼痛水平有轻微影响(证据确定性低),但可能增加严重(证据确定性中等)和非严重不良事件(证据确定性极低)的风险。曲马多用于疼痛管理的潜在危害可能超过其有限的益处。
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
BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine
BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
3.40%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine (BMJ EBM) publishes original evidence-based research, insights and opinions on what matters for health care. We focus on the tools, methods, and concepts that are basic and central to practising evidence-based medicine and deliver relevant, trustworthy and impactful evidence. BMJ EBM is a Plan S compliant Transformative Journal and adheres to the highest possible industry standards for editorial policies and publication ethics.
×
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