Broad Syntheses that include this review

loading
3 articles (3 Referencias) loading Revertir Estudificar

Síntesis amplia / Revisión panorámica de revisiones sistemáticas

No clasificado

Revista Anesthesia and analgesia
Año 2017
Cargando información sobre las referencias
Numerous interventions for neuropathic pain (NeuP) are available, but its treatment remains unsatisfactory. We systematically summarized evidence from systematic reviews (SRs) of randomized controlled trials on interventions for NeuP. Five electronic databases were searched up to March 2015. Study quality was analyzed using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews. The most common interventions in 97 included SRs were pharmacologic (59%) and surgical (15%). The majority of analyzed SRs were of medium quality. More than 50% of conclusions from abstracts on efficacy and approximately 80% on safety were inconclusive. Effective interventions were described for painful diabetic neuropathy (pregabalin, gabapentin, certain tricyclic antidepressants [TCAs], opioids, antidepressants, and anticonvulsants), postherpetic neuralgia (gabapentin, pregabalin, certain TCAs, antidepressants and anticonvulsants, opioids, sodium valproate, topical capsaicin, and lidocaine), lumbar radicular pain (epidural corticosteroids, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation [rTMS], and discectomy), cervical radicular pain (rTMS), carpal tunnel syndrome (carpal tunnel release), cubital tunnel syndrome (simple decompression and ulnar nerve transposition), trigeminal neuralgia (carbamazepine, lamotrigine, and pimozide for refractory cases, rTMS), HIV-related neuropathy (topical capsaicin), and central NeuP (certain TCAs, pregabalin, cannabinoids, and rTMS). Evidence about interventions for NeuP is frequently inconclusive or completely lacking. New randomized controlled trials about interventions for NeuP are necessary; they should address safety and use clear diagnostic criteria.

Síntesis amplia / Living FRISBEE

No clasificado

Autores Flores S , Molina M
Revista Medwave
Año 2015
Cargando información sobre las referencias
There are several nonsurgical alternatives to treat radicular pain in degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Epidural steroid injections have been used for several decades, but the different studies have shown variable effects. Searching in Epistemonikos database, which is maintained by screening 30 databases, we identified nine systematic reviews including seven pertinent randomized controlled trials. We concluded epidural steroid injection probably leads to little or no effect on reducing radicular pain of spinal stenosis.

Síntesis amplia

No clasificado

Revista Physical medicine and rehabilitation clinics of North America
Año 2014
Cargando información sobre las referencias
La mayoría de las guías clínicas no recomiendan el uso rutinario de las inyecciones epidurales de esteroides para el tratamiento del dolor lumbar crónico. Sin embargo, muchos médicos no se adhieren a estas directrices. Esta visión global evidencia la conclusión de que fuera de etiqueta inyecciones epidurales de esteroides proporcionan pequeños a corto plazo, pero no a largo plazo el alivio de la pierna sin dolor y mejoría de la función; inyección de esteroides no es más eficaz que la inyección de anestésicos locales por sí solas; complicaciones post-procedimiento son poco comunes, pero el riesgo de contaminación y de infecciones graves es muy alta. La evidencia no apoya el uso rutinario de off-label inyecciones epidurales de esteroides en adultos con dolor radicular lumbosacro benigna.