Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Volume 88, Issue 12 , Pages 1547-1560, December 2007

Comparison of the Effectiveness of Amitriptyline and Gabapentin on Chronic Neuropathic Pain in Persons With Spinal Cord Injury

Presented to the American Pain Society, May 2006, San Antonio, TX, and the American Association of Spinal Cord Injury Psychologists and Social Workers, September 2006, Las Vegas, NV.

  • Diana H. Rintala, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, TX
    • Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests to Diana H. Rintala, PhD, MEDVAMC (153), 2002 Holcombe Blvd, Houston, TX 77030
  • ,
  • Sally Ann Holmes, MD

      Affiliations

    • Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, TX
    • Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX
  • ,
  • Daisy Courtade, MA

      Affiliations

    • Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, TX
    • Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX
  • ,
  • Richard Neil Fiess

      Affiliations

    • Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, TX
    • Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX
  • ,
  • Luz Viviana Tastard, MD

      Affiliations

    • Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, TX
    • Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX
  • ,
  • Paul G. Loubser, MD

      Affiliations

    • Bayshore Medical Center, Pasadena, TX.

Abstract 

Rintala DH, Holmes SA, Courtade D, Fiess RN, Tastard LV, Loubser PG. Comparison of the effectiveness of amitriptyline and gabapentin on chronic neuropathic pain in persons with spinal cord injury.

Objective

To test the hypotheses that both amitriptyline and gabapentin are more effective in relieving neuropathic pain than an active placebo, diphenhydramine.

Design

Randomized, controlled, double blind, triple crossover 8-week trial.

Setting

Veterans Affairs medical center.

Participants

Community dwelling adults with spinal cord injury (N=38) were recruited by telephone, letters, and flyers.

Intervention

Eight-week trial each of amitriptyline, gabapentin, and diphenhydramine.

Main Outcome Measures

Pain intensity measured with a 10-cm visual analog scale (VAS) and an 11-point (0–10) numeric rating scale (NRS) and depressive symptomatology measured with the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale−Short Form (CESD-SF).

Results

Baseline VAS scores for participants with low (<10) CESD-SF scores was 4.61 and for those with high scores (≥10) it was 7.41. At week 8, in participants with high baseline CESD-SF scores, amitriptyline (mean, 4.21) was more effective than diphenhydramine (mean, 6.67; P=.035), and there was a nonsignificant trend suggesting that amitriptyline may be more effective than gabapentin (mean, 6.68; P=.061). Gabapentin was no more effective than diphenhydramine (P=.97). There was no significant difference among the medications for those with lower CESD-SF scores. Results could not be attributed to dropout rates, order or dose of medications, amount of medication taken for breakthrough pain, or side effects.

Conclusions

Amitriptyline is more efficacious in relieving neuropathic pain than diphenhydramine at or below the level of spinal cord injury in people who have considerable depressive symptomatology.

Key Words: Amitriptyline, Depression, Diphenhydramine, Pain, intractable, Rehabilitation, Spinal cord injuries

 

 Supported by the Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Rehabilitation Research and Development Service (grant no. B2573R).

 No commercial party having a direct financial interest in the results of the research supporting this article has or will confer a benefit upon the author(s) or upon any organization with which the author(s) is/are associated.

PII: S0003-9993(07)01541-9

doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2007.07.038

Refers to erratum:

  • Correction

    Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation June 2008 (Vol. 89, Issue 6, Page 1206)

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Volume 88, Issue 12 , Pages 1547-1560, December 2007