This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
Abstract
Objective To explore the hypothesis that earlier administration of acute gabapentinoids is beneficial to motor recovery after spinal cord injury in humans.
Methods This is an observational study using a cohort from the European Multi-Centre Study about Spinal Cord Injury. Patient charts were reviewed to extract information regarding the administration and timing of gabapentinoid anticonvulsants. The primary outcome measure was motor scores, as measured by the International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury, collected longitudinally in the first year after injury. Sensory scores (light touch and pinprick) and functional measures (Spinal Cord Independence Measure) were secondary outcomes. Linear mixed effects regression models included a drug-by-time interaction to determine whether exposure to gabapentinoids altered recovery of muscle strength in the first year after injury.
Results A total of 201 participants were included in the study and had a median age of 46 and baseline motor score of 50. Participants were mostly men (85%) with sensory and motor complete injuries (50%). Seventy individuals (35%) were administered gabapentinoids within the first 30 days after injury, and presented with similar demographics. In the longitudinal model, the administration of gabapentinoids within 30 days after injury was associated with improved motor recovery when compared to those who did not receive gabapentinoids during this time (3.69 additional motor points from 4 to 48 weeks after injury; p = 0.03). This effect size increased as administration occurred earlier after injury (i.e., a benefit of 4.68 points when administered within 5 days).
Conclusions This retrospective, observational study provided evidence of the beneficial effect of gabapentinoid anticonvulsants on motor recovery after spinal cord injury. More critically, it highlighted a potential time dependence, suggesting that earlier intervention is associated with better outcomes.
Classification of evidence: This study provides Class IV evidence that gabapentinoids improve motor recovery for individuals with acute spinal cord injury.
Glossary
- AIS=
- American Spinal Cord Injury Association Impairment Scale;
- ANOVA=
- analysis of variance;
- CI=
- confidence interval;
- EMSCI=
- European Multi-Centre Study about Spinal Cord Injury;
- ISNCSCI=
- International Standards for the Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury;
- SCIM=
- Spinal Cord Independence Measure
Footnotes
Go to Neurology.org/N for full disclosures. Funding information and disclosures deemed relevant by the authors, if any, are provided at the end of the article.
Class of Evidence: NPub.org/coe
- Received December 9, 2019.
- Accepted in final form August 12, 2020.
- © 2020 American Academy of Neurology
AAN Members
We have changed the login procedure to improve access between AAN.com and the Neurology journals. If you are experiencing issues, please log out of AAN.com and clear history and cookies. (For instructions by browser, please click the instruction pages below). After clearing, choose preferred Journal and select login for AAN Members. You will be redirected to a login page where you can log in with your AAN ID number and password. When you are returned to the Journal, your name should appear at the top right of the page.
AAN Non-Member Subscribers
Purchase access
Disputes & Debates: Rapid online correspondence
NOTE: All authors' disclosures must be entered and current in our database before comments can be posted. Enter and update disclosures at http://submit.neurology.org. Exception: replies to comments concerning an article you originally authored do not require updated disclosures.
- Stay timely. Submit only on articles published within the last 8 weeks.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- 200 words maximum.
- 5 references maximum. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- 5 authors maximum. Exception: replies can include all original authors of the article.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.