ArticlePain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain2024
Comparing the effectiveness of pregabalin and gabapentin in patients with lumbar radiculopathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative Effectiveness of Pregabalin With Duloxetine Versus Pregabalin With Amitriptyline in Chronic Low Back Pain With Radiculopathy: A Prospective Comparative Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Efficacy and Safety of Acupuncture and Acupuncture-Combined Therapies in the Treatment of Sciatica Caused by Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Network Meta-Analysis.Journal of pain research · 2025Article
- Comparing the effectiveness of pregabalin and gabapentin in patients with lumbar radiculopathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGabapentinoids are commonly prescribed to control neuropathic pain of lumbar radiculopathy. Few trials have compared the efficacy of gabapentin (GBP) and pregabalin (PGB). Therefore, the authors conducted a meta-analysis to compare the difference in effect between GBP and PGB in lumbar radiculopathy patients.
methodsArticles which were published between January 1, 1960 and May 31, 2023 were investigated via Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, Google Scholar, and MEDLINE. This meta-analysis was conducted on patients with lumbar radiculopathy. Gabapentin was used as an intervention, and pregabalin as a comparison. As outcomes, pain rating scales including visual analog scale (VAS) and numeric pain rating scale (NRS), and number of adverse events (dizziness and sedation) were obtained.
resultsPGB showed statistically significant improvement in pain scale (VAS and NRS) in short-term follow-up (6 weeks or less) compared to GBP. (Total mean difference of -0.31) However, in the long-term follow-up (6 weeks to 12 weeks), there was no difference in pain reduction effect between two groups. The incidence of AEs showed no difference between two groups.
conclusionBased on this article, the existing evidence suggests that PGB was more effective in reducing pain of lumbar radiculopathy compared to GBP at the short-term follow-up, but there was no difference in the long-term follow-up. Physicians should consider this finding in prescribing medications for patients with lumbar radiculopathy.
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.