SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Medications for Managing Central Neuropathic Pain as a Result of Underlying Conditions-A Systematic Review.

Neurol Int · 2025-05-20

DOI: 10.3390/neurolint17050077PMID: 40423233

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

Background: This systematic review assessed the current literature regarding the analgesic treatment of central neuropathic pain (CNP) in central nervous system (CNS) conditions, such as spinal cord injuries, multiple sclerosis, post-stroke disorders, and Parkinson's disease. The aim of this systematic review was to compare the current algorithmic treatment of CNP, which generally does not discriminate among underlying conditions, with RCTs investigating algorithm-recommended and non-algorithm-recommended drugs for differing underlying conditions. Methods: The PubMed and EMBASE databases were used to identify relevant randomized control trials (RCTs). MeSH terms and EmTree terms were searched as well as free text words in the title/abstract of the studies. A risk of bias tool was used to assess all included studies. Results: A total of 903 RCTs were identified from the initial search. Thirty-eight RCTs published between January 2002 and November 2024 fulfilled all the inclusion criteria and none of the exclusion criteria. The review investigated progressive and stable neurological diseases and conditions with associated CNP. Conclusions: From the majority of the included studies, the current recommended treatment algorithm seems to be effective and safe; however, the underlying condition seems to influence how the patient responds to tier-appropriate medication.

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.