ReviewHand (New York, N.Y.)2024
Pharmacologic Treatments in Upper Extremity Complex Regional Pain Syndrome: A Review and Analysis of Quality of Evidence.
Review in Hand (New York, N.Y.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this study was to assess the quality of evidence informing on common pharmacologic modalities used in upper extremity complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS).
methodsA literature search was performed for primary prospective trials that reported on the pharmacologic treatment of CRPS type I and II specific to the upper extremity. Thirty-one trials were included and evaluated by 2 independent reviewers according to the Oxford Levels of Evidence (LOE), modified Coleman Methodology Score, and the revised Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) score. Cohen's kappa coefficient was calculated to measure interrater reliability.
resultsTwenty-two Oxford LOE I and 9 level II trials met the inclusion criteria. Overall, there was high interrater reliability in the Oxford LOE (100% agreement), modified Coleman Methodology Score (87% agreement), and CONSORT score (94% agreement). The pharmacologic interventions with the highest quality of evidence supporting use in treatment of upper extremity CRPS were bisphosphonates and ketamine. Interventions that lack high-quality evidence are tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) and topical dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO). Pharmacologic agents that remain inconclusive are calcitonin, gabapentin, mycophenolate, probiotics, steroids, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, vitamin C, and
conclusionsBased on the evidence evaluated in this study, bisphosphonates should be considered as a first-line medication in the treatment of CRPS. In patients presenting with chronic or refractory CRPS, strong consideration should be given for the use of ketamine. Adjunct treatment in the acute setting should include TCAs and/or topical DMSO.
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.