MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946431843 · doi:10.1213/ane.0000000000004185

Ketamine Infusions for Chronic Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2019· review· en· W2946431843 on OpenAlexaff
Vwaire Orhurhu, Mariam Salisu Orhurhu, Anuj Bhatia, Steven P. Cohen

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesia & Analgesia · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTreatment of Major Depression
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineKetamineRandomized controlled trialPlaceboChronic painAnalgesicMeta-analysisAdverse effectNeuropathic painAnesthesiaMEDLINEPublication biasRelative riskInternal medicinePhysical therapyConfidence intervalAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: IV ketamine is widely used to treat patients with chronic pain, yet the long-term impact remains uncertain. We synthesized evidence from randomized control trials to investigate the effectiveness of IV ketamine infusions for pain relief in chronic conditions and to determine whether any pain classifications or treatment regimens are associated with greater benefit. METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase, and Google Scholar, as well as the clinicaltrials.gov website from inception through December 16, 2017 for randomized control trials comparing IV ketamine to placebo infusions for chronic pain that reported outcomes for ≥48 hours after the intervention. Three authors independently screened the studies, pooled the data, and appraised risk of bias. Random-effects model was used to calculate weighted mean differences for pain scores and secondary outcomes. Our primary outcome was the lowest recorded pain score ≥48 hours after cessation of treatment. Secondary outcomes included responder rate and adverse effects. RESULTS: Among 696 studies assessed for eligibility, 7 met inclusion criteria. All studies except one were at high risk of bias. These studies randomly assigned 211 patients with neuropathic (n = 2), mixed (n = 2), and nonneuropathic (nociplastic or nociceptive) (n = 3) pain. Three studies reported significant analgesic benefit favoring ketamine, with the meta-analysis revealing a small effect up to 2 weeks after the infusion (mean difference in pain scores, -1.83 points on a 0-10 numerical rating scale; 95% CI, -2.35 to -1.31 points; P < .0001). In the 3 studies that reported responder rates, the proportion with a positive outcome was greater in the ketamine than in the placebo group (51.3% vs 19.4%; relative risk, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.10-5.40; P = .029; I = 0.0%). No differences were noted based on pain classification or condition. Compared to low-dose ketamine studies and investigations that evaluated non-complex regional pain syndrome conditions, a small but nonsignificant greater reduction in pain scores was found among studies that either utilized high-dose ketamine therapy (P = .213) or enrolled complex regional pain syndrome patients (P = .079). CONCLUSIONS: Evidence suggests that IV ketamine provides significant short-term analgesic benefit in patients with refractory chronic pain, with some evidence of a dose-response relationship. Larger, multicenter studies with longer follow-ups are needed to better select patients and determine the optimal treatment protocol.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.055
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.055
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0250.036
Bibliometrics0.0080.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.132
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations169
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesia & AnalgesiaSame topicTreatment of Major DepressionFrench-language works237,207