Premium
A comparative study on the effects of naltrexone and loratadine on uremic pruritus
Author(s) -
LegrouxCrespel E.,
Clèdes J.,
Misery L.
Publication year - 2004
Publication title -
experimental dermatology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.108
H-Index - 96
eISSN - 1600-0625
pISSN - 0906-6705
DOI - 10.1111/j.0906-6705.2004.0212ci.x
Subject(s) - naltrexone , medicine , loratadine , adverse effect , nausea , visual analogue scale , anesthesia , gastroenterology , antagonist , receptor
Two recent studies have provided opposite results on the efficacy of naltrexone on uremic pruritus. We have performed a third study. We compared efficacy and tolerance of naltrexone and loratadine on uremic pruritus. Among 296 hemodialysed patients, 65 suffered from uremic pruritus. 52 patients participated in the study. Patients were treated for 2 weeks with naltrexone (50 mg/day; 26 patients) or loratadine (10 mg/day; 26 patients), after a washout of 48 h. Pruritus intensity was scored by a visual analog scale (VAS). Adverse events were carefully searched. The two groups were statistically equivalent. There was no significant difference in the mean VAS scores after treatment, but naltrexone allowed a dramatic decrease of VAS sores (Δ > 3/10) in seven patients. Adverse events (mainly nausea and sleep disturbances) were observed in 10 of 26 patients. We could notice that 22% of hemodialysed patients suffered from uremic pruritus. Naltrexone was effective only in a subset of patients. Adverse events were very frequent. The differences of efficacy and tolerance between patients might be due to metabolism. Naltrexone might be considered as a second‐line treatment.