Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews Protocol - Intervention

Non‐antiepileptic drugs for trigeminal neuralgia

This is not the most recent version

Collapse all Expand all

Abstract

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows:

The objective of this review is to examine the efficacy of non‐antiepileptic drugs used to treat TN.

The following hypotheses will be tested:
1.Therapy A* is more effective in controlling TN than placebo treatment.
2.Therapy A* is more effective in controlling TN than no treatment.
3. Therapy A* is more effective in controlling TN than carbamazepine
4.Therapy B* is more effective in controlling TN than placebo treatment.
5.Therapy B* is more effective in controlling TN than no treatment.
6.Therapy B* is more effective in controlling TN than Therapy A.
7.Therapy B* is more effective in controlling TN than carbamazepine.

*Therapy A = baclofen, pimozide, racemic ketamine, proparacaine and tocainade or any other single non‐antiepileptic therapeutic agent studied in the literature.
*Therapy B =combination of any two drugs of Therapy A.

Background

Trigeminal neuralgia (TN) is defined by the International Association for the Study of Pain, as a sudden, usually unilateral, severe brief stabbing recurrent pain in the distribution of one or more branches of the fifth cranial nerve (Merskey 1994). The International Headache Society (Anonymous 1988), lays down the following criteria for TN:

A. Paroxysmal attacks of facial or frontal pain which last a few seconds to less than two minutes.

B. Pain with at least four of the following characteristics:
1. distribution along one or more divisions of the trigeminal nerve;
2. sudden, intense sharp, superficial, stabbing or burning in quality;
3. pain intensity severe;
4. precipitation from trigger areas, or by certain daily activities such as eating, talking, washing the face or cleaning the teeth;
5. between paroxysms the patients is entirely asymptomatic.

C. No neurological deficit.

D. Attacks are stereotyped in the individual patient.

E. Exclusion of other causes of facial pain by history, physical examination and special investigation when necessary.

The diagnosis of TN is based on clinical findings although there have not been any case controlled studies to validate diagnostic methods. A careful history and examination can distinguish between TN and other disorders that cause facial pain (Zakrzewska 2002 (a)).

Trigeminal neuralgia has an annual occurrence rate of 3 to 5 per 100,000 people. It is found more often in women than in men (age‐adjusted ratio, 1.74:1) and is most common from age 50 to 69 years. Attacks are more commonly on the right (Yoshimasu 1972; Katusic 1990).

The aetiology of TN is not clear. There are obvious problems in determining the causes of a syndrome, formulated on the basis of subjective pain rather than hard signs or laboratory abnormalities. However, in the last three decades, evidence has been mounting that in a large proportion of cases, compression of the trigeminal nerve root at or near the dorsal root entry zone by a blood vessel is a major causative or contributing factor (Devor 2002). Compression is not always found and so it is necessary to look for other factors. In a few cases, TN is due to multiple sclerosis. Other, rare causes include infiltration of the nerve root, trigeminal ganglion or nerve by a tumour or amyloid, and small infarcts or angiomas in the pons or medulla (Cheng 1993). Once all of these possibilities have been excluded, there remains a small proportion of patients in whom the aetiology is undetermined (Nurmikko 2001).

Spontaneous remission of TN is common, but the disorder is often progressive. Remission may last for months or even years, but, as the attacks become more frequent, the patient may develop persistent pain between episodes. Attacks may come in clusters and can completely disrupt activities of daily living if left untreated (Katusic 1990; Zakrzewska 2002 (b)).

Antiepileptic drugs have been used in pain management since the 1960s. The clinical impression is that they are useful for neuropathic pain, especially when the pain is lancinating or burning (Jacox 1994; Wiffen 2002). From three placebo‐controlled studies of carbamazepine in TN, a Cochrane systematic review deduced a number needed to treat (95%) confidence interval (CI)) for effectiveness of 2.5 (CI 2.0‐3.4). Lamotrigine has been used in a randomised controlled trial as an add on therapy and this small trial found that addition of lamotrigine was effective (Zakrzewska 1997). Little evidence supports a beneficial role of other antiepileptic drugs such as clonazepam, gabapentin, phenytoin and sodium valproate for TN (Wiffen 2002). The long‐term effects of carbamazepine have been evaluated in one study only, showing either loss of effect or problems with tolerability in one half of patients after 10 years (Taylor 1981). A long‐term cohort study on oxcarbazepine suggests that the pain increases with time rather than the drug becoming less effective (Zakrzewska 2002 (b)).

Several non‐antiepileptic drugs have been used to treat TN since the 1980s. Conventional analgesics such as aspirin, codeine and non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs are not used since experience suggests that they are not helpful. Drugs used include: baclofen, pimozide, racemic ketamine, proparacaine and tocainide. Baclofen is a gamma‐aminobutyric acid receptor agonist that has the least serious adverse effects (Steardo 1984). A double blind crossover study showed a significant decrease in the number of TN attacks when treated with baclofen, even in patients who had become unresponsive to carbamazepine (Fromm 1984; Cheshire 1997; Turp 1996). Pimozide is a neuroleptic that has shown significant relief of pain when compared with carbamazepine in a double blind crossover trial. Patients in this study had been diagnosed as having TN for at least two years and were treated with carbamazepine or pimozide. Adverse effects were common with pimozide, but mild, and no patients stopped the treatment because of side effects (Lechin 1989). Racemic ketamine, an anaesthetic, showed some benefit when treating acute pain but was ineffective for pain lasting more than five years (Mathisen 1995). The use of topical ophthalmic anaesthetics, such as proparacaine, has been reported to relieve TN pain in some patients, but a randomised trial showed no change in the frequency or severity of attacks (Kondziolka 1994). The analgesic effect of tocainide was also reported in 1987 (Lindstrom 1987). There is no known systematic review of non‐antiepileptic drug treatment for trigeminal neuralgia. Sindrup and Jensen (Sindrup 1999) have done a systematic review of drugs used in TN and there is also a review in Clinical Evidence that is updated every eight months at www. clinicalevidence. org (Zakrzewska 2001).

The aim of this review is to review systematically all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi‐randomised controlled trials, which examine the effectiveness of non‐antiepileptic drugs for TN.

Objectives

The objective of this review is to examine the efficacy of non‐antiepileptic drugs used to treat TN.

The following hypotheses will be tested:
1.Therapy A* is more effective in controlling TN than placebo treatment.
2.Therapy A* is more effective in controlling TN than no treatment.
3. Therapy A* is more effective in controlling TN than carbamazepine
4.Therapy B* is more effective in controlling TN than placebo treatment.
5.Therapy B* is more effective in controlling TN than no treatment.
6.Therapy B* is more effective in controlling TN than Therapy A.
7.Therapy B* is more effective in controlling TN than carbamazepine.

*Therapy A = baclofen, pimozide, racemic ketamine, proparacaine and tocainade or any other single non‐antiepileptic therapeutic agent studied in the literature.
*Therapy B =combination of any two drugs of Therapy A.

Methods

Criteria for considering studies for this review

Types of studies

We will search for all randomised or quasi‐randomised controlled trials involving non‐antiepileptic drugs in the treatment of TN irrespective of any language restrictions.

Types of participants

We will include all patients with TN.

Types of interventions

We will include administration of any non‐antiepileptic drug to achieve analgesia. The drugs will include: baclofen, pimozide, racemic ketamine, proparacaine and tocainide or any other single non‐antiepileptic therapeutic agent or combinations of them.

Any dose regimen of any of the above therapies will be included.

Types of outcome measures

The primary outcome measure will be the proportion of patients with a good initial effect evaluated by pain intensity or TN score two to eight weeks after treatment.

Secondary outcome measures will be:
1.the number of patients with a good long‐term effect evaluated by pain intensity or TN score at least twelve weeks after treatment;
2.the number of patients reporting adverse effects attributable to non‐antiepileptic drugs.

Search methods for identification of studies

See: Collaborative Review Group search strategy
We will search the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group register for randomised controlled trials published in all languages using 'trigeminal neuralgia' and its synonyms, 'tic douloureux', as well as search terms including non‐antiepileptic therapies. We will also search MEDLINE (January 2001 to the present), EMBASE (January 2001 to the present), LILACS (January 1982 to the present), the Chinese Biomedical Retrieval System (January 2001 to the present) and the RCT, CCT Database of Chinese EBM/Cochrane Center (January 2002 to the present). We will review the bibliographies of the randomised trials and contact the authors and known experts in the field to identify additional published or unpublished data.

Data collection and analysis

Study selection
Two reviewers will scrutinize titles and abstracts identified from the register. The full text of any study of possible relevance will be obtained for independent assessment. The reviewers will decide which trials fit the inclusion criteria and grade their methodological quality. Disagreements about inclusion criteria will be resolved by discussion between the reviewers. If necessary and possible we will contact authors for clarification.

Assessment of methodological quality
The assessment of methodological quality will take into account secure randomisation, allocation concealment, patient and observer blinding, completeness of follow up and intention to treat analysis. Each parameter of trial quality will be assessed according to Cochrane Collaboration standard Grade A: adequate, Grade B: unclear, Grade C: inadequate, Grade D: not done.

Two reviewers will assess quality independently. Disagreement between the reviewers will be resolved by discussion.

Extraction of data
Information about the pain condition and number of patients studied, non‐antiepileptic drug and dosing regimen, study design, study duration and follow‐up, analgesic outcome measures and results, withdrawals and adverse effects (minor and major) will be collected from each study.

Data on patients, methods, interventions, outcomes and results will be extracted and checked by two reviewers independently using a data extraction form. Missing data will be obtained from the authors whenever possible.

Analysis
We will calculate a weighted treatment effect with the Cochrane statistical package, RevMan. Results will be expressed as relative risks (RRs) or risk differences (RDs) with 95% confidence intervals for dichotomous outcomes and weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals for continuous outcomes. All outcomes under consideration will be analyzed.

Heterogeneity in the results of the trials will be assessed both by looking at a graphical plot of the results and by testing for heterogeneity in the results across studies using a Mantel‐Haenszel chi‐squared test.

We will use a funnel plot to investigate the possibility of publication bias. Effect size will be plotted against study size, resulting in a graphical display, which will give some indication whether or not some studies with particular study and effect size combination have not been published or located.

We will conduct subgroup analyses of different classes of non‐antiepileptic drugs.