ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2023
Effectiveness and Adverse Events of Gabapentinoids as Analgesics for Patients with Burn Injuries: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of gabapentinoids in orthopedic surgeries: a systematic review and meta-analysis of postoperative pain, and opioid-sparing effects.BMC anesthesiology · 2025Pooled it
- Patient-Reported Pain and Itch Scores After a Course of Laser Therapy for the Treatment of Postburn Hypertrophic Scar Are Impacted by Mental Health Status.Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
(1) Background: Pain after a burn injury is difficult to endure, and emerging studies aim to ascertain the effects of gabapentin and pregabalin as non-opioid treatment options. (2) Methods: We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in six databases. The risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2.0 tool. We performed meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis and used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology for judging the certainty of evidence (CoE). (3) Results: Five RCTs were included. Compared with placebo, gabapentinoids significantly decreased the pain intensity within 24 h (mean difference (MD) = -1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI): -1.47--0.65) and from 72 h to 9 days (MD = -0.82, 95% CI: -1.16--0.48), but not after 3 weeks (MD = -0.44, 95% CI: -1.31-0.42). Opioid consumption (mg/day) was reduced within 24 h (MD = -13.34, 95% CI: -22.16--4.52) and from 72 h to 9 days (MD = -7.87, 95% CI: -14.82--0.91). Increased risks of drowsiness (risk ratio (RR) = 3.255, 95% CI: 1.135-9.335) and dizziness (RR = 3.034, 95% CI: 1.006-9.147) were observed, but sensitivity analysis using the Bayesian method showed no increased risk. All endpoints were judged as low to very low CoE. (4) Conclusions: Gabapentinoids offer modest analgesic benefits as a component of multimodal pain management for burn injuries of less than 3 weeks. The adverse effects should be carefully monitored. Large-scale RCTs are warranted for the reinforcement of CoE in clinical use.
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.