Efficacy and safety of the Ca(v)2.2 blocker Ziconotide in pain: a meta-analysis and systematic review

Ca(v)2.2阻滞剂齐考诺肽治疗疼痛的疗效和安全性:一项荟萃分析和系统评价

阅读:2

Abstract

Chronic pain remains a significant clinical challenge, especially in refractory cases. Ziconotide, a selective Ca(v)2.2 channel blocker, offers an intrathecal approach, but concerns about its safety, potential biases, and impact on opioid consumption persist. Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of 23 studies (1,531 participants) to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and secondary outcomes of Ziconotide. Key outcomes were pain intensity reduction, adverse events, and serious adverse events. As secondary outcomes, we assessed changes in opioid consumption. The risk of bias and the certainty of evidence were assessed using risk of bias 2 and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation for randomized controlled trials, ROBINS-I and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies, and the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist for case reports. Publication bias was explored using funnel plot analysis. Ziconotide demonstrated significant pain reduction compared with placebo (mean difference: -22.54, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -36.70 to -8.38, P = 0.002), although heterogeneity was high. Adverse events were frequent (94.9% vs 76.9% in placebo; risk ratio 1.24, 95% CI: 1.09-1.41, P = 0.0008), with serious adverse events reported in 17.85% patients (risk ratio 2.63, 95% CI: 1.52-4.57, P = 0.0006). Secondary outcomes suggested potential reductions in opioid consumption in observational studies, with decreases ranging from 6.4% to 91.5%, though randomized trials showed inconsistent results. Certainty of the evidence was rated as low to moderate. Although Ziconotide shows promise as an intrathecal treatment for refractory pain, its frequent adverse effects, the availability of high-certainty evidence, and inconclusive impact on opioid consumption highlight the need for cautious use. This meta-analysis underscores the need for future research.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。