NMDA receptor antagonists and pain relief: A meta-analysis of experimental trials.

Trevor Thompson, Fiona Whiter, Katy Gallop, Nicola Veronese, Marco Solmi, Paul Newton, Brendon Stubbs

Journal: Neurology 2019;92(14):e1652-e1662

PMID: 30842296

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a meta-analysis of controlled trials that used experimental models of acute pain and hyperalgesia to examine the analgesic effects of NMDA receptor (NMDAR) antagonists.

METHODS

Six major databases were systematically searched (to March 2018) for studies using human evoked pain models to compare NMDAR antagonists with no-intervention controls. Pain outcome data were analyzed with random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Searches identified 70 eligible trials (n = 1,069). Meta-analysis found that low-dose ketamine (<1 mg/kg) produced a decrease in hyperalgesic area (standardized mean difference 0.54, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.34, 0.74, < 0.001) and a 1.2-point decrease (95% CI 0.88, 1.44, < 0.001) in pain ratings from 4.6 to 3.4 on a 0-10 scale (a 26% reduction). Similar analgesia was observed for acute and hyperalgesic models and was constant across the dosing range (0.03-1.00 mg/kg). Moderate to high variability in effect size was observed and mild side effects (e.g., sedation, sensory disturbance) were common. No effects of dextromethorphan were found.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings provide robust evidence for analgesic and antihyperalgesic effects of ketamine, supporting its utility for acute and chronic pain management. However, pain relief was modest, suggesting ketamine may potentially be most useful when opioids are contraindicated, rapid analgesia is required, or for pain resistant to conventional medication.

© 2019 American Academy of Neurology.

Address: From the Faculty of Education and Health (T.T., F.W.), University of Greenwich, London; York Health Economics Consortium (F.W.), University of York; Acaster Lloyd Consulting Ltd. (K.G.), London, UK; Neurosciences Department (N.V.), Aging Branch, National Research Council, Padova; Neuroscience Centre (M.S.), University of Padova, Italy; Department of Adult Nursing & Paramedic Science (P.N.), University of Greenwich, London; Physiotherapy Department (B.S.), South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust; and Department of Psychological Medicine (B.S.), Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, De Crespigny Park, London, UK. [email protected].; From the Faculty of Education and Health (T.T., F.W.), University of Greenwich, London; York Health Economics Consortium (F.W.), University of York; Acaster Lloyd Consulting Ltd. (K.G.), London, UK; Neurosciences Department (N.V.), Aging Branch, National Research Council, Padova; Neuroscience Centre (M.S.), University of Padova, Italy; Department of Adult Nursing & Paramedic Science (P.N.), University of Greenwich, London; Physiotherapy Department (B.S.), South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust; and Department of Psychological Medicine (B.S.), Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, De Crespigny Park, London, UK.
Bant logo

© Copyright 2026, Nutrition Evidence

NED wishes to thank the following organisations for their support:

We use cookies to improve your experience and analyze site traffic with Google Analytics. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more.