Background

Diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) is a frequent complication in people living with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. There is currently no effective treatment for DPN. Although alpha‐lipoic acid (ALA, also known as thioctic acid) is widely used, there is no consensus about its benefits and harms.

Objectives

To assess the effects of alpha‐lipoic acid as a disease‐modifying agent in people with diabetic peripheral neuropathy.

Search methods

On 11 September 2022, we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two clinical trials registers. We also searched the reference lists of the included studies and relevant review articles for additional references not identified by the electronic searches.

Selection criteria

We included randomised clinical trials (RCTs) that compared ALA with placebo in adults (aged 18 years or older) and that applied the study interventions for at least six months. There were no language restrictions.

Data collection and analysis

We used standard methods expected by Cochrane. The primary outcome was change in neuropathy symptoms expressed as changes in the Total Symptom Score (TSS) at six months after randomisation. Secondary outcomes were change in neuropathy symptoms at six to 12 months and at 12 to 24 months, change in impairment, change in any validated quality of life total score, complications of DPN, and adverse events. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.

Main results

Our analysis incorporated three trials involving 816 participants. Two studies included people with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, while one study included only people with type 2 diabetes. The duration of treatment was between six months and 48 months. We judged all studies at high risk of overall bias due to attrition.

ALA compared with placebo probably has little or no effect on neuropathy symptoms measured by TSS (lower score is better) after six months (mean difference (MD) −0.16 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) −0.83 to 0.51; 1 study, 330 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence). The CI of this effect estimate did not contain the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of 0.97 points. ALA compared with placebo may have little or no effect on impairment measured by the Neuropathy Impairment Score‐Lower Limbs (NIS‐LL; lower score is better) after six months (MD −1.02 points, 95% CI −2.93 to 0.89; 1 study, 245 participants; low‐certainty evidence). However, we cannot rule out a significant benefit, because the lower limit of the CI surpassed the MCID of 2 points. There is probably little or no difference between ALA and placebo in terms of adverse events leading to cessation of treatment within six months (risk ratio (RR) 1.48, 95% CI 0.50 to 4.35; 3 studies, 1090 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence).

No studies reported quality of life or complications associated with DPN.

Authors' conclusions

Our analysis suggests that ALA probably has little or no effect on neuropathy symptoms or adverse events at six months, and may have little or no effect on impairment at six months. All the studies were at high risk of attrition bias. Therefore, future RCTs should ensure complete follow‐up and transparent reporting of any participants missing from the analyses.