Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2012 Feb 13:344:e497.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.e497.

Drugs for relief of pain in patients with sciatica: systematic review and meta-analysis

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Drugs for relief of pain in patients with sciatica: systematic review and meta-analysis

Rafael Zambelli Pinto et al. BMJ. .

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the efficacy and tolerability of analgesic and adjuvant pain drugs typically administered in primary care for the management of patients with sciatica.

Design: Systematic review. Data source International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, PsycINFO, Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials (CENTRAL), CINAHL, and LILACS.

Study selection: Randomised controlled trials assessing the efficacy and tolerability of drugs versus placebo or other treatment for sciatica.

Data extraction: Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed methodological quality using the PEDro scale. Pain and disability outcomes were converted to a common 0 to 100 scale. Data were pooled with a random effects model, and the GRADE approach was used in summary conclusions.

Results: Twenty three published reports met the inclusion criteria. The evidence to judge the efficacy of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), corticosteroids, antidepressants, anticonvulsants, muscle relaxants, and opioid analgesics ranged from moderate to low quality. Most of the pooled estimates did not favour the active treatment over placebo. The pooled results of two trials of corticosteroids (mean difference in overall and leg pain -12.2, 95% confidence interval -20.9 to -3.4) and a single trial of the anticonvulsant gabapentin for chronic sciatica (mean difference in overall pain relief -26.6, -38.3 to -14.9) showed some benefits but only in the short term. The median rate of adverse events was 17% (interquartile range 10-30%) for the active drugs and 11% (3-23%) for placebo. Trial limitations included failure to use validated outcome measures, lack of long term follow-up, and small sample size.

Conclusions: As the existing evidence from clinical trials is of low quality, the efficacy and tolerability of drugs commonly prescribed for the management of sciatica in primary care is unclear.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf (available on request from the corresponding author) and declare: no support from any organisation for the submitted work; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

Figures

None
Fig 1 Selection process of trials examining pain relief in patients with sciatica
None
Fig 2 Mean difference for pain and disability in placebo controlled trials on pain relief in patients with sciatica. Overall pain, leg pain, back pain, and disability expressed on common 0-100 scale. Immediate=follow-up evaluations ≤ 2 weeks after randomisation; short term=follow-up evaluations >2 weeks but ≤3 months; intermediate=follow-up evaluations >3 months but <12 months; long term=≥12 months. NSAID=non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug
None
Fig 3 Pooled mean difference for immediate pain in trials comparing NSAID v placebo. Pain expressed on common 0-100 scale. Immediate=follow-up evaluations ≤2 weeks after randomisation; short term=follow-up evaluations >2 weeks but ≤3 months; intermediate=follow-up evaluations >3 months but <12 months; long term=≥12 months. NSAID=non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug
None
Fig 4 Mean difference for pain and disability in trials comparing NSAID versus NSAID or other treatments. Overall pain, leg pain, back pain and disability expressed on common 0-100 scale. Immediate=follow-up evaluations ≤2 weeks after randomisation; short term=follow-up evaluations >2 weeks but ≤3 months; intermediate=follow-up evaluations >3 months but <12 months; long term=≥12 months. NSAID=non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug. *Injection contains methylprednisolone 40 mg, dexamethasone 8 mg, 2% prolocaine 7 ml, 0.9% NaCL 10 ml)

Comment in

References

    1. Koes BW, van Tulder MW, Peul WC. Diagnosis and treatment of sciatica. BMJ 2007;334:1313-7. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Konstantinou K, Dunn KM. Sciatica: review of epidemiological studies and prevalence estimates. Spine 2008;33:2464-72. - PubMed
    1. Balague F, Nordin M, Sheikhzadeh A, Echegoyen AC, Brisby H, Hoogewoud HM, et al. Recovery of severe sciatica. Spine 1999;24:2516-24. - PubMed
    1. Selim AJ, Ren XS, Fincke G, Deyo RA, Rogers W, Miller D, et al. The importance of radiating leg pain in assessing health outcomes among patients with low back pain. Results from the Veterans’ Health Study. Spine 1998;23:470-4. - PubMed
    1. Tubach F, Beaute J, Leclerc A. Natural history and prognostic indicators of sciatica. J Clin Epidemiol 2004;57:174-9. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms