ArticleBrain sciences2019
Intranasal Pregabalin Administration: A Review of the Literature and the Worldwide Spontaneous Reporting System of Adverse Drug Reactions.
Article in Brain sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rise of Pregabalin Poisoning and Abuse Cases in Serbia: A Ten-Year Retrospective Study.International journal of general medicine · 2023Article
- Current Evidence on Abuse and Misuse of Gabapentinoids.Drug safety · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIt is repeatedly reported that pregabalin (PRG) and gabapentin feature a potential for abuse/misuse, predominantly in patients with former or active substance use disorder. The most common route of use is oral, though reports of sublingual, intravenous, rectal, and smoking administration also exist. A narrative review was performed to provide an overview of current knowledge about nasal PRG use.
methodsA narrative review of the currently available literature of nasal PRG use was performed by searching the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases. The abstracts and articles identified were reviewed and examined for relevance. Secondly, a request regarding reports of cases of nasal PRG administration was performed in the worldwide spontaneous reporting system of adverse drug reactions of the European Medicines Agency (EMA, EudraVigilance database).
resultsThe literature search resulted in two reported cases of nasal PRG use. In the analysis of the EMA-database, 13 reported cases of nasal PRG use (11 male (two not specified), mean age of users = 34.2 years (four not specified)) were found. In two cases fatalities occurred related to PRG nasal use.
conclusionsEven if only little evidence can be found in current literature, the potential for misuse/abuse of PRG via nasal route might be of particular importance in the near future in PRG users who misuse it. Physicians should be aware of these alternative routes of administration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.