Premium
A systematic review and meta‐analysis of naltrexone implants for the treatment of opioid dependence
Author(s) -
Larney Sarah,
Gowing Linda,
Mattick Richard P.,
Farrell Michael,
Hall Wayne,
Degenhardt Louisa
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
drug and alcohol review
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.018
H-Index - 74
eISSN - 1465-3362
pISSN - 0959-5236
DOI - 10.1111/dar.12095
Subject(s) - naltrexone , medicine , placebo , meta analysis , opioid , confidence interval , methadone , randomized controlled trial , adverse effect , anesthesia , alternative medicine , receptor , pathology
and Aims Naltrexone implants are used to treat opioid dependence, but their safety and efficacy remain poorly understood. We systematically reviewed the literature to assess the safety and efficacy of naltrexone implants for treating opioid dependence. Design and Methods Studies were eligible if they compared naltrexone implants with another intervention or placebo. Examined outcomes were induction to treatment, retention in treatment, opioid and non‐opioid use, adverse events, non‐fatal overdose and mortality. Quality of the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Data from randomised studies were combined using meta‐analysis. Data from non‐randomised studies were presented narratively. Results Five randomised trials ( n = 576) and four non‐randomised studies ( n = 8358) were eligible for review. The quality of the evidence ranged from moderate to very low. N altrexone implants were superior to placebo implants [risk ratio ( RR ): 0.57; 95% confidence interval ( CI ) 0.48, 0.68; k = 2] and oral naltrexone ( RR : 0.57; 95% CI 0.47, 0.70; k = 2) in suppressing opioid use. No difference in opioid use was observed between naltrexone implants and methadone maintenance (standardised mean difference: −0.33; 95% CI −0.93, 0.26; k = 1); however, this finding was based on low‐quality evidence from one study. Discussion The evidence on safety and efficacy of naltrexone implants is limited in quantity and quality, and the evidence has little clinical utility in settings where effective treatments for opioid dependence are used. Conclusion Better designed research is needed to establish the safety and efficacy of naltrexone implants. Until such time, their use should be limited to clinical trials. [Larney S, Gowing L, Mattick RP, Farrell M, Hall W, Degenhardt L. A systematic review and meta‐analysis of naltrexone implants for the treatment of opioid dependence. Drug Alcohol Rev 2014;33:115–128]