SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Gabapentin-Associated Movement Disorders: A Literature Review.

Medicines (Basel) · 2023-09-06

DOI: 10.3390/medicines10090052PMID: 37755242

Open accessreview-article; Review; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

BackgroundGabapentin (GBP)-induced movement disorders (MDs) are under-recognized adverse drug reactions. They are commonly not discussed with patients, and their sudden occurrence can lead to misdiagnosis. This literature review aims to evaluate the clinical-epidemiological profile, pathological mechanisms, and management of GBP-associated MD.MethodsTwo reviewers identified and assessed relevant reports in six databases without language restriction between 1990 and 2023.ResultsA total of 99 reports of 204 individuals who developed a MD associated with GBP were identified. The MDs encountered were 135 myoclonus, 22 dyskinesias, 7 dystonia, 3 akathisia, 3 stutterings, 1 myokymia, and 1 parkinsonism. The mean and median ages were 54.54 (SD: 17.79) and 57 years (age range: 10-89), respectively. Subjects were predominantly male (53.57%). The mean and median doses of GBP when the MD occurred were 1324.66 (SD: 1117.66) and 1033 mg/daily (GBP dose range: 100-9600), respectively. The mean time from GBP-onset to GBP-associated MD was 4.58 weeks (SD: 8.08). The mean recovery time after MD treatment was 4.17 days (SD: 4.87). The MD management involved GBP discontinuation. A total of 82.5% of the individuals had a full recovery in the follow-up period.ConclusionsMyoclonus (GRADE A) and dyskinesia (GRADE C) were the most common movement disorders associated with GBP.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.