-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2022Although pain is common in osteoarthritis, most people fail to achieve adequate analgesia. Increasing acknowledgement of the contribution of pain sensitisation has... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Although pain is common in osteoarthritis, most people fail to achieve adequate analgesia. Increasing acknowledgement of the contribution of pain sensitisation has resulted in the investigation of medications affecting pain processing with central effects. Antidepressants contribute to pain management in other conditions where pain sensitisation is present.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of antidepressants for the treatment of symptomatic knee and hip osteoarthritis in adults.
SEARCH METHODS
We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search was January 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials of adults with osteoarthritis that compared use of antidepressants to placebo or alternative comparator. We included trials that focused on efficacy (pain and function), treatment-related adverse effects and had documentation regarding discontinuation of participants. We excluded trials of less than six weeks of duration or had participants with concurrent mental health disorders.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methods. Major outcomes were pain; responder rate; physical function; quality of life; and proportion of participants who withdrew due to adverse events, experienced any adverse events or had serious adverse events. Minor outcomes were proportion meeting the OARSI (Osteoarthritis Research Society International) Response Criteria, radiographic joint structure changes and proportion of participants who dropped out of the study for any reason. We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
Nine trials (2122 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Seven trials examined only knee osteoarthritis. Two also included participants with hip osteoarthritis. All trials compared antidepressants to placebo, with or without non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Trial sizes were 36 to 388 participants. Most participants were female, with mean ages of 54.5 to 65.9 years. Trial durations were 8 to 16 weeks. Six trials examined duloxetine. We combined data from nine trials in meta-analyses for knee and hip osteoarthritis. One trial was at low risk of bias in all domains. Five trials were at risk of attrition and reporting bias. High-certainty evidence found that antidepressants resulted in a clinically unimportant improvement in pain compared to placebo. Mean reduction in pain (0 to 10 scale, 0 = no pain) was 1.7 points with placebo and 2.3 points with antidepressants (mean difference (MD) -0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.88 to -0.31; 9 trials, 2122 participants). Clinical response was defined as achieving a 50% or greater reduction in 24-hour mean pain. High-certainty evidence demonstrated that 45% of participants receiving antidepressants had a clinical response compared to 28.6% receiving placebo (RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.32 to 1.82; 6 RCTs, 1904 participants). This corresponded to an absolute improvement in pain of 16% more responders with antidepressants (8.9% more to 26% more) and a number needed to treat for an additional beneficial effect (NNTB) of 6 (95% CI 4 to 11). High-certainty evidence showed that the mean improvement in function (on 0 to 100 Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index, 0 = best function) was 10.51 points with placebo and 16.16 points with antidepressants (MD -5.65 points, 95% CI -7.08 to -4.23; 6 RCTs, 1909 participants). This demonstrates a small, clinically unimportant response. Moderate-certainty evidence (downgraded for imprecision) showed that quality of life measured using the EuroQol 5-Dimension scale (-0.11 to 1.0, 1.0 = perfect health) improved by 0.07 points with placebo and 0.11 points with antidepressants (MD 0.04, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.07; 3 RCTs, 815 participants). This is clinically unimportant. High-certainty evidence showed that total adverse events increased in the antidepressant group (64%) compared to the placebo group (49%) (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.41; 9 RCTs, 2102 participants). The number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) was 7 (95% CI 5 to 11). Low-certainty evidence (downgraded twice for imprecision for very low numbers of events) found no evidence of a difference in serious adverse events between groups (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.94; 9 RCTs, 2101 participants). The NNTH was 1000. Moderate-certainty evidence (downgraded for imprecision) showed that 11% of participants receiving antidepressants withdrew from trials due to an adverse event compared to 5% receiving placebo (RR 2.15, 95% CI 1.56 to 2.97; 6 RCTs, 1977 participants). The NNTH was 17 (95% CI 10 to 35).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is high-certainty evidence that use of antidepressants for knee osteoarthritis leads to a non-clinically important improvement in mean pain and function. However, a small number of people will have a 50% or greater important improvement in pain and function. This finding was consistent across all trials. Pain in osteoarthritis may be due to a variety of causes that differ between individuals. It may be that the cause of pain that responds to this therapy is only present in a small number of people. There is moderate-certainty evidence that antidepressants have a small positive effect on quality of life with heterogeneity between trials. High-certainty evidence indicates antidepressants result in more adverse events and moderate-certainty evidence indicates more withdrawal due to adverse events. There was little to no difference in serious adverse events (low-certainty evidence due to low numbers of events). This suggests that if antidepressants were being considered, there needs to be careful patient selection to optimise clinical benefit given the known propensity for adverse events with antidepressant use. Future trials should include alternative antidepressant agents or phenotyping of pain in people with osteoarthritis, or both.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Antidepressive Agents; Duloxetine Hydrochloride; Osteoarthritis, Hip; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Pain; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36269595
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012157.pub2 -
International Journal of Surgery... Apr 2023The aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of duloxetine for postoperative recovery after total knee arthroplasty. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
The aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of duloxetine for postoperative recovery after total knee arthroplasty.
METHODS
The following electronic databases were searched for eligible trials: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, VIP, Wanfang Data, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI). The search was performed from the inception dates to 10 August 2022. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed by two independent reviewers. Standard mean differences or mean differences with 95% CIs for pooled data were calculated. The primary outcomes were pain, physical function, and analgesic consumption. Secondary outcomes included range of motion (ROM) of the knee, depression, and mental health.
RESULTS
This meta-analysis included 11 studies, reporting on a total of 1019 patients. Results of analyses indicated that duloxetine showed a statistically significant reduction in pain at rest at 3 days, 1 week, 2, and 6 weeks and pain on movement at 5 days, 1 week, 2, 4, 6, and 8 weeks. However, there was no statistical significance in pain at rest and on movement at 24 h, 12 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months. Additionally, duloxetine had a significant improvement in physical function, ROM of the knee at 6 weeks, and emotional function (depression and mental health). Moreover, the cumulative opioid consumption at 24 h in the duloxetine groups was lower than in the control groups. But there was no statistical significance for the cumulative opioid consumption over 7 days between the duloxetine groups and controls.
CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, duloxetine might reduce pain mainly over a time span of 3 days-8 weeks and lower cumulative opioid consumption within 24 h. In addition, it improved physical function, ROM of the knee with a time span of 1-6 weeks and emotional function (depression and mental health).
Topics: Humans; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Duloxetine Hydrochloride; Analgesics, Opioid; Knee Joint; Pain, Postoperative
PubMed: 37097617
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000230 -
Systematic Reviews Mar 2023Painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (PDPN) is a key concern in clinical practice. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we compared duloxetine and placebo... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (PDPN) is a key concern in clinical practice. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we compared duloxetine and placebo treatments in terms of their efficacy and safety in patients with PDPN.
METHODS
Following the PRISMA guidelines, we searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase databases for relevant English articles published before January 11, 2021. Treatment efficacy and safety were assessed in terms of pain improvement, patient-reported health-related performance, and patients' quality of life.
RESULTS
We reviewed a total of 7 randomized controlled trials. Regarding pain improvement, duloxetine was more efficacious than placebo (mean difference [MD] - 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI] - 1.09 to - 0.69; P < .00001). Furthermore, duloxetine significantly improved the patients' quality of life, which was assessed using the Clinical Global Impression severity subscale (MD - 0.48; 95% CI - 0.61 to - 0.36; P < .00001), Patient Global Impression of Improvement scale (MD - 0.50; 95% CI - 0.64 to - 0.37; P < .00001), and European Quality of Life Instrument 5D version (MD 0.04; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.07; P = .0002). Severe adverse events were rare, whereas nausea, somnolence, dizziness, fatigue, constipation, and decreased appetite were common; approximately, 12.6% of all patients dropped out because of the common symptoms.
CONCLUSIONS
Duloxetine is more efficacious than placebo treatments in patients with PDPN. The rarity of severe adverse events indicates that duloxetine is safe. When a 60-mg dose is insufficient, 120 mg of duloxetine may improve PDPN symptoms. Our findings may help devise optimal treatment strategies for PDPN.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42021225451.
Topics: Humans; Duloxetine Hydrochloride; Diabetic Neuropathies; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Pain; Diabetes Mellitus
PubMed: 36945033
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-023-02185-6 -
Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology Jun 2023Fibromyalgia (FM) is characterised by a form of debilitating pain that is unresponsive to standard analgesics. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
OBJECTIVES
Fibromyalgia (FM) is characterised by a form of debilitating pain that is unresponsive to standard analgesics. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of supplementing ongoing pregabalin (PGB) and duloxetine (DLX) treatment with palmitoylethanolamide (PEA) and acetyl-L-carnitine (ALC) for 24 weeks in FM patients.
METHODS
After undergoing three months of stable treatment with DLX+PGB, FM patients were randomised to continue the same treatment (Group 1) or to add PEA 600 mg b.i.d + ALC 500 mg b.i.d. (Group 2) for a further 12 weeks. Every two weeks throughout the study, cumulative disease severity was estimated using the Widespread Pain Index (WPI) as the primary outcome measure; the secondary outcomes were the fortnightly scores of the patient-completed revised Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQR) and the modified Fibromyalgia Assessment Status (FASmod) questionnaire. All three measures were expressed as time-integrated area under the curve (AUC) values.
RESULTS
One hundred and thirty (91.5%) of the initial 142 FM patients completed the study: 68 patients in Group 1 and 62 in Group 2. Twenty-four weeks after randomisation, the Group 2 patients showed additional significant improvements in all three outcome measures. Although there was some fluctuation in both groups during the study period, the AUC values of the WPI scores steadily decreased in Group 2 (p=0.048), which also showed better outcomes in terms of the AUC values of the FIQR (p=0.033) and FASmod scores (p=0.017).
CONCLUSIONS
This is the first randomised controlled study demonstrating the effectiveness of the adding on therapy of PEA+ALC to DLX+PGB in FM patients.
Topics: Humans; Fibromyalgia; Duloxetine Hydrochloride; Pregabalin; Acetylcarnitine; Treatment Outcome; Analgesics; Pain
PubMed: 37378482
DOI: 10.55563/clinexprheumatol/pmdzcq -
American Family Physician Aug 2016Painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy occurs in approximately 25% of patients with diabetes mellitus who are treated in the office setting and significantly affects... (Review)
Review
Painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy occurs in approximately 25% of patients with diabetes mellitus who are treated in the office setting and significantly affects quality of life. It typically causes burning pain, paresthesias, and numbness in a stocking-glove pattern that progresses proximally from the feet and hands. Clinicians should carefully consider the patient's goals and functional status and potential adverse effects of medication when choosing a treatment for painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy. Pregabalin and duloxetine are the only medications approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for treating this disorder. Based on current practice guidelines, these medications, with gabapentin and amitriptyline, should be considered for the initial treatment. Second-line therapy includes opioid-like medications (tramadol and tapentadol), venlafaxine, desvenlafaxine, and topical agents (lidocaine patches and capsaicin cream). Isosorbide dinitrate spray and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation may provide relief in some patients and can be considered at any point during therapy. Opioids and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors are optional third-line medications. Acupuncture, traditional Chinese medicine, alpha lipoic acid, acetyl-l-carnitine, primrose oil, and electromagnetic field application lack high-quality evidence to support their use.
Topics: Administration, Topical; Amines; Amitriptyline; Analgesics; Analgesics, Opioid; Anesthetics, Local; Capsaicin; Cyclohexanecarboxylic Acids; Diabetic Neuropathies; Duloxetine Hydrochloride; Gabapentin; Humans; Isosorbide Dinitrate; Lidocaine; Phenols; Pregabalin; Sensory System Agents; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Serotonin and Noradrenaline Reuptake Inhibitors; Tapentadol; Tramadol; Transcutaneous Electric Nerve Stimulation; Vasodilator Agents; Venlafaxine Hydrochloride; gamma-Aminobutyric Acid
PubMed: 27479625
DOI: No ID Found -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2018Fibromyalgia is a chronic widespread pain condition affecting millions of people worldwide. Current pharmacotherapies are often ineffective and poorly tolerated.... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Fibromyalgia is a chronic widespread pain condition affecting millions of people worldwide. Current pharmacotherapies are often ineffective and poorly tolerated. Combining different agents could provide superior pain relief and possibly also fewer side effects.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of combination pharmacotherapy compared to monotherapy or placebo, or both, for the treatment of fibromyalgia pain in adults.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase to September 2017. We also searched reference lists of other reviews and trials registries.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Double-blind, randomised controlled trials comparing combinations of two or more drugs to placebo or other comparators, or both, for the treatment of fibromyalgia pain.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
From all studies, we extracted data on: participant-reported pain relief of 30% or 50% or greater; patient global impression of clinical change (PGIC) much or very much improved or very much improved; any other pain-related outcome of improvement; withdrawals (lack of efficacy, adverse events), participants experiencing any adverse event, serious adverse events, and specific adverse events (e.g. somnolence and dizziness). The primary comparison was between combination and one or all single-agent comparators. We also assessed the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 16 studies with 1474 participants. Three studies combined a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) with a benzodiazepine (306 participants); two combined amitriptyline with fluoxetine (89 participants); two combined amitriptyline with a different agent (92 participants); two combined melatonin with an antidepressant (164 participants); one combined carisoprodol, paracetamol (acetaminophen), and caffeine (58 participants); one combined tramadol and paracetamol (acetaminophen) (315 participants); one combined malic acid and magnesium (24 participants); one combined a monoamine oxidase inhibitor with 5-hydroxytryptophan (200 participants); and one combined pregabalin with duloxetine (41 participants). Six studies compared the combination of multiple agents with each component alone and with inactive placebo; three studies compared combination pharmacotherapy with each individual component but did not include an inactive placebo group; two studies compared the combination of two agents with only one of the agents alone; and three studies compared the combination of two or more agents only with inactive placebo.Heterogeneity among studies in terms of class of agents evaluated, specific combinations used, outcomes reported, and doses given prevented any meta-analysis. None of the combinations of drugs found provided sufficient data for analysis compared with placebo or other comparators for our preferred outcomes. We therefore provide a narrative description of results. There was no or inadequate evidence in any comparison for primary and secondary outcomes. Two studies only reported any primary outcomes of interest (patient-reported pain relief of 30%, or 50%, or greater). For each 'Risk of bias' item, only half or fewer of studies had unequivocal low risk of bias. Small size and selective reporting were common as high risk of bias.Our GRADE assessment was therefore very low for primary outcomes of pain relief of 30% or 50% or greater, PGIC much or very much improved or very much improved, any pain-related outcome, participants experiencing any adverse event, any serious adverse event, or withdrawing because of an adverse event.Three studies found some evidence that combination pharmacotherapy reduced pain compared to monotherapy; these trials tested three different combinations: melatonin and amitriptyline, fluoxetine and amitriptyline, and pregabalin and duloxetine. Adverse events experienced by participants were not serious, and where they were reported (in 12 out of 16 studies), all participants experienced them, regardless of treatment. Common adverse events were nausea, dizziness, somnolence, and headache.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There are few, large, high-quality trials comparing combination pharmacotherapy with monotherapy for fibromyalgia, consequently limiting evidence to support or refute the use of combination pharmacotherapy for fibromyalgia.
Topics: 5-Hydroxytryptophan; Acetaminophen; Adult; Amitriptyline; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Antidepressive Agents; Benzodiazepines; Carisoprodol; Drug Therapy, Combination; Duloxetine Hydrochloride; Fibromyalgia; Fluoxetine; Humans; Magnesium; Malates; Melatonin; Monoamine Oxidase Inhibitors; Muscle Relaxants, Central; Pregabalin; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 29457627
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010585.pub2 -
Journal of the American Veterinary... Nov 2019To describe abnormal clinical signs following duloxetine ingestion in dogs.
OBJECTIVE
To describe abnormal clinical signs following duloxetine ingestion in dogs.
ANIMALS
364 client-owned dogs that ingested duloxetine.
PROCEDURES
The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Animal Poison Control Center electronic database was searched for records of dogs with duloxetine ingestion between January 2012 and December 2016. Data collected included age, body weight, breed, duloxetine exposure and dose, clinical signs, and overall outcome. Clinical signs were categorized as either neurologic, digestive, cardiovascular, respiratory, or metabolic and endocrine. Outcomes were categorized as no clinical signs, fully recovered, died, or unknown.
RESULTS
Clinical signs developed in 55 of the 364 (15.1%) dogs with known ingestion of duloxetine. The most common clinical signs were lethargy (22/55 [40%]), mydriasis (18/55 [33%]), vomiting (11/55 [20%]), and trembling (6/55 [11%]). Dogs that ingested an estimated dose of duloxetine ≥ 20 mg/kg (9.1 mg/lb) were more likely to have had abnormal clinical signs than were dogs that ingested < 20 mg/kg.
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE
Findings indicated that most dogs in the present study did not have clinical signs associated with ingestion of duloxetine and that development of clinical signs varied by individual dog. Further information is needed to determine toxic dose ranges for duloxetine ingestion in dogs. ( 2019;255:1161-1166).
Topics: Animals; Dog Diseases; Dogs; Duloxetine Hydrochloride; Poison Control Centers; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 31687894
DOI: 10.2460/javma.255.10.1161 -
Medicine Aug 2023Duloxetine, a serotonin-norepinephrine dual reuptake inhibitor, may improve analgesia after total joint arthroplasty (TJA). However, there is still no consensus on its... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Duloxetine, a serotonin-norepinephrine dual reuptake inhibitor, may improve analgesia after total joint arthroplasty (TJA). However, there is still no consensus on its effectiveness and safety. We conducted the meta-analysis to investigate the analgesic effect and safety of duloxetine for the treatment of patients received total knee or hip arthroplasty.
METHODS
Pubmed, Cochrane Central Registry for Clinical Trials, Embase, OVID, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched using a predetermined search strategy from inception to September 21, 2022. Only randomized controlled trials of duloxetine in treatment of patients after total knee or hip arthroplasty were included. Data collection and extraction, quality assessment, and data analyses were performed according to the Cochrane standards.
RESULTS
A total of 8 randomized controlled trials with 739 patients were included in the literature review of postoperative pain and adverse effects. The result of meta-analysis showed statistically significant lower opioid requirement with duloxetine (P < .05) for the different postoperative period. Duloxetine group had significant reductions in visual analog score for the 24-hour (walking: WMD = -0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -1.69 to -0.26, P = .007; resting: WMD = -1.06; 95%CI = -1.85 to -0.27, P = .008) and 1-week (walking: WMD = -0.96; 95%CI = -1.42 to -0.50, P < .001; resting: WMD = -0.69; 95%CI = -1.22 to -0.16, P = .01); knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score over 3-month (WMD = 2.94; 95%CI = -0.30 to 6.18, P = .008) and complication (odds ratio = 4.74; 95%CI = 0.23 to 96.56, P = .01) postoperative period compared with the control group. However, no difference on numeric rating scale (P > .05) for the different postoperative period; visual analog score (P > .05) for the 6-week or 3-month and knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (P > .05) for the 6-week postoperative period. Furthermore, it did not increase the incidence of adverse effects (odds ratio = 0.87; 95%CI = 0.72 to 1.05, P = .15).
CONCLUSION
Duloxetine could decrease the opioids consumption and relieve early postoperative pain without increasing the risk of adverse medication effects in patients undergoing total knee or hip arthroplasty. Considering the ongoing opioid epidemic, duloxetine could act as a good supplement in multimodal pain management protocol for patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty.
Topics: Humans; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Duloxetine Hydrochloride; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Pain Management; Knee Joint; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Analgesics, Opioid; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37653762
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000034895 -
Frontiers in Psychiatry 2019Duloxetine hydrochloride (DUL) is an antidepressant included in the pharmacological class of serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors approved for the treatment of... (Review)
Review
Duloxetine hydrochloride (DUL) is an antidepressant included in the pharmacological class of serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors approved for the treatment of major depressive disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain, fibromyalgia, and chronic musculoskeletal pain. The aim of this review was to elucidate current evidences on the use of DUL in the treatment of a variety of psychiatric disorders. This systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. PubMed database was searched from January 1, 2003, to September 30, 2018, using 11 key terms related to psychiatric disorders ("persistent depressive disorder," "dysthymic disorder," "bipolar disorder," "seasonal affective disorder," "obsessive-compulsive disorder," "social phobia," "panic disorder," "posttraumatic stress disorder," "schizophrenia," "eating disorders," "sexual disorders," "personality disorders") and one key term related to duloxetine ("duloxetine hydrochloride"). Article titles and abstracts were scanned to determine relevance to the topic. For additional studies, the authors also examined the reference lists of several of the included papers. Duloxetine may be an effective treatment for mood spectrum disorders, panic disorder, several symptom clusters of borderline personality, and as add-on drug in schizophrenia. Modest or conflicting results have been found for the efficacy of duloxetine in obsessive-compulsive disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, eating, and sexual disorders. Major limitations of the reviewed studies were short trial duration, small sample sizes, and the lack of control groups. Defining the potential role of DUL in the treatment of psychiatric disorders other than major depressive disorder and generalized anxiety disorder needs further randomized, placebo-controlled studies.
PubMed: 31749717
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00772 -
Gastroenterology and Hepatology From... 2022As few randomized clinical trials have verified the efficacy of selective and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors in IBS, the current study made an inclusive comparison...
AIM
As few randomized clinical trials have verified the efficacy of selective and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors in IBS, the current study made an inclusive comparison between them, and their effectiveness in IBS-C was proven.
BACKGROUND
Irritable bowel syndrome with constipation (IBS-C) is a functional bowel disorder characterized by changes in bowel movements and abdominal pain in the absence of identifiable structural abnormalities. Despite much progress in the treatment of other types of IBS, limited treatments are available for IBS-C.
METHODS
The study population comprised 182 IBS-C patients who were randomly divided into 3 groups according to treatment type. One group was given 20 mg of dicyclomine and fluoxetine, the second group received dicyclomine along with duloxetine hydrochloride, and the third group received dicyclomine only for two months. The severity of symptoms was recorded by questionnaire at the beginning and end of the treatment.
RESULTS
The average age and BMI of the patients were 28.5 ± 5.2 years and 25.2 ± 2.4 kg/m2, respectively. Duloxetine was more effective than fluoxetine in reducing flatulence (=0.043), abdominal pain intensity (≤0.046), and duration (≤0.003), in increasing the quality of life (≤0.046), and the frequency of fecal excretion in patients (≤0.004).
CONCLUSION
Based on the study findings, fluoxetine and duloxetine had greater therapeutic effects on all symptoms of IBD than dicyclomine, with duloxetine, specifically, being more effective than fluoxetine. Further studies on larger groups are suggested to determine the best dosage and identify any potential side effects of these drugs.
PubMed: 35611252
DOI: No ID Found