-
Medicina Oral, Patologia Oral Y Cirugia... May 2022The diagnosis of oral melanotic lesions is, more often than not, challenging in the clinical practice due to the fact that there are several reasons which may cause an... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The diagnosis of oral melanotic lesions is, more often than not, challenging in the clinical practice due to the fact that there are several reasons which may cause an increase in pigmentation on localized or generalized areas. Among these, medication stands out.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
In this work, we have carried out a review in the reference pharma database: Micromedex® followed by a review of the scientific published literature to analyse coincidences and possible discrepancies.
RESULTS
Our findings show that there are several prescription drugs that can cause pigmented lesions in the oral mucosa. This must be known by clinicians in order to properly diagnose pigmented lesions. We have identified a set of 21 medicaments which cause these lesions, some of which are used frequently in the clinic, such as Metronidazole, Amitriptyline, conjugated oestrogens and Chlorhexidine gluconate. We also found discrepancies with the data published in specialized literature, some of which wasn't reflected in the Summary of Product Characteristics.
CONCLUSIONS
Our work highlights the importance of the proper communication of adverse drug reactions (ADR) by health professionals in order to provide thorough and accurate information and diagnosis.
Topics: Humans; Mouth Mucosa; Oral Ulcer; Pigmentation
PubMed: 35420067
DOI: 10.4317/medoral.25110 -
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 -
Drug Delivery and Translational Research Apr 2022Amitriptyline, administered orally, is currently one of the treatment options for the management of neuropathic pain and migraine. Because of the physicochemical...
Amitriptyline, administered orally, is currently one of the treatment options for the management of neuropathic pain and migraine. Because of the physicochemical properties of the molecule, amitriptyline is also a promising candidate for delivery as a topical analgesic. Here we report the dermal delivery of amitriptyline from a range of simple formulations. The first stage of the work required the conversion of amitriptyline hydrochloride to the free base form as confirmed by nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR). Distribution coefficient values were measured at pH 6, 6.5, 7, and 7.4. Solubility and stability of amitriptyline were assessed prior to conducting in vitro permeation and mass balance studies. The compound demonstrated instability in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) dependent on pH. Volatile formulations comprising of isopropyl alcohol (IPA) and isopropyl myristate (IPM) or propylene glycol (PG) were evaluated in porcine skin under finite dose conditions. Compared with neat IPM, the IPM:IPA vehicles promoted 8-fold and 5-fold increases in the amount of amitriptyline that permeated at 24 h. Formulations containing PG also appear to be promising vehicles for dermal delivery of amitriptyline, typically delivering higher amounts of amitriptyline than the IPM:IPA vehicles. The results reported here suggest that further optimization of topical amitriptyline formulations should be pursued towards development of a product for clinical investigational studies.
Topics: Administration, Cutaneous; Amitriptyline; Analgesia; Analgesics; Animals; Excipients; Propylene Glycol; Skin; Skin Absorption; Swine
PubMed: 33886076
DOI: 10.1007/s13346-021-00982-x -
Frontiers in Cell and Developmental... 2021Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of the COVID-19 pandemic with severe consequences for afflicted individuals and the society as... (Review)
Review
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of the COVID-19 pandemic with severe consequences for afflicted individuals and the society as a whole. The biology and infectivity of the virus has been intensively studied in order to gain a better understanding of the molecular basis of virus-host cell interactions during infection. It is known that SARS-CoV-2 binds to angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) via its spike protein. Priming of the virus by specific proteases leads to viral entry via endocytosis and to the subsequent steps in the life cycle of SARS-CoV-2. Sphingosine and ceramide belong to the sphingolipid family and are abundantly present in cell membranes. These lipids were recently shown to interfere with the uptake of virus particles of SARS-CoV-2 into epithelial cell lines and primary human nasal cells in culture. The mechanisms of action were partly different, as sphingosine blocked, whilst ceramide facilitated viral entry. Acid sphingomyelinase (ASM) is vital for the generation of ceramide and functional inhibition of ASM by drugs like amitriptyline reduced SARS-CoV-2 entry into the epithelial cells. Recent data indicates that serum level of sphingosine-1-phosphate (S1P) is a prognostic factor for COVID-2 severity. Further, stimulation of sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor 1 (S1PR1) might also constrain the hyper-inflammatory conditions linked to SARS-CoV-2. Here, we review recent exciting findings regarding sphingolipids in the uptake of SARS-CoV-2 and in the course of COVID-19 disease. More studies are required on the mechanisms of action and the potential use of antidepressant drugs and sphingolipid modifiers in SARS-CoV-2 infections and in the treatment of the more serious and fatal consequences of the disease.
PubMed: 34222257
DOI: 10.3389/fcell.2021.689854 -
Annals of the Academy of Medicine,... Apr 2020Amitriptyline (AMT) is a tricyclic antidepressant. In this review, we evaluate the clinical and epidemiological profile, pathological mechanisms and management of... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Amitriptyline (AMT) is a tricyclic antidepressant. In this review, we evaluate the clinical and epidemiological profile, pathological mechanisms and management of AMT-associated movement disorders.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A search for relevant reports in 6 databases was performed. Studies that reported patients developed only ataxia or tremor after AMT use were excluded.
RESULTS
A total of 48 reports on 200 cases were found. AMT-associated movement disorders included myoclonus (n = 26), dyskinesia (n = 11), dystonia (n = 8), stutter (n = 5), akathisia (n = 3) and restless legs syndrome (n = 1). For less well-defined cases, 99 patients had dyskinesia, 19 had psychomotor disturbances, 3 had myoclonus, 11 had dystonia, 12 had Parkinsonism and 1 each had akathisia and extrapyramidal symptoms. Mean and standard deviation (SD) and median ages were 45.40 years (SD 16.78) and 40 years (range 3.7-82 years), respectively. Over half were women (58.13%) and the most common indication was depression. Mean and median AMT doses were 126 mg (SD 128.76) and 75 mg (range 15-800 mg), respectively. In 68% of patients, onset of movement disorders was <1 month; time from AMT withdrawal to complete recovery was <1 month in 70% of cases. A weak negative linear correlation (r = -0.0904) was found between onset of movement disorders and AMT dose. AMT withdrawal was the most common treatment.
CONCLUSION
Amitriptyline is associated with various movement disorders, particularly myoclonus, dystonia and dyskinesias. Stutters and restless legs syndrome are some of the less common associations.
Topics: Amitriptyline; Antidepressive Agents, Tricyclic; Humans; Movement Disorders
PubMed: 32419008
DOI: No ID Found -
Frontiers in Pain Research (Lausanne,... 2022Burning mouth syndrome (BMS) is defined by chronic oral burning sensations without any corresponding abnormalities. Besides amitriptyline, aripiprazole has been reported...
Burning mouth syndrome (BMS) is defined by chronic oral burning sensations without any corresponding abnormalities. Besides amitriptyline, aripiprazole has been reported as a possible medication to manage BMS. However, especially for elderly patients, the adverse events of these medications would be a problem. The aim of the present study was to investigate the differences in the effectiveness and adverse events of amitriptyline and aripiprazole in very elderly patients with BMS. This is a retrospective comparative study of 80 years old and older patients with BMS who were initially treated with amitriptyline or aripiprazole and who were new outpatients of our department from April 2017 to March 2020. All clinical data, including sex, age, comorbid physical diseases, comorbid psychiatric disorders, the prescribed doses (initial, maximum, and effective dose), prognosis, and adverse events, were collected from their medical charts. Each medication was selected considering their medical history. Amitriptyline was prescribed in 13 patients (11 women, 82.3 ± 2.1 years old) and aripiprazole was prescribed in 27 patients (26 women, 84.2 ± 3.8 years old). There were no significant between-group differences in sex, age, duration of illness, pain intensity, salivation, and psychiatric comorbidity at the first examination. Amitriptyline clinically improved more patients (7 patients, 53.8%) with the effective dose of 10 (7.5, 15.0) mg than aripiprazole (11 patients, 40.7%) of which the effective dose was 1.0 (0.5, 1.5) mg, although there were no significant between-group differences. The adverse events of amitriptyline were found in 9 patients (69.2%) and most patients had constipation (46.2%). For aripiprazole, 7 patients (25.9%) showed adverse events, most of them reported sleep disorder (11.1%). Amitriptyline had significantly longer duration taking medication ( = 0.021) and lower discontinuation ( = 0.043) despite of higher occurrence rate of adverse events ( = 0.015) compared to aripiprazole. These results suggest that both psychopharmacotherapies with a low dose of amitriptyline and aripiprazole are effective for the very elderly patients with BMS. Furthermore, aripiprazole may have some advantages in the adverse events compared to amitriptyline; however, the low dose amitriptyline monotherapy may have more benefit in the effectiveness and tolerability over prudent collaboration with primary physicians.
PubMed: 35295804
DOI: 10.3389/fpain.2022.809207 -
Medicina Aug 2023There is a wealth of information on early pharmacological supportive treatment for early rehabilitation following acute ischemic stroke. This review aims to provide... (Review)
Review
There is a wealth of information on early pharmacological supportive treatment for early rehabilitation following acute ischemic stroke. This review aims to provide healthcare professionals involved in rehabilitating patients with a summary of the available evidence to assist with decision-making in their daily clinical practice. A search for randomized clinical trials and observational studies published between 1/1/2000 and 28/8/2022 was performed using PubMed, Cochrane and Epistemonikos as search engines with language restriction to english and spanish. The selected studies included patients older than 18 with acute ischemic stroke undergoing early rehabilitation. The outcomes considered for efficacy were: motor function, language, and central pain. The selected pharmacological interventions were: cerebrolysin, levodopa, selegiline, amphetamines, fluoxetine, citalopram, escitalopram, antipsychotics, memantine, pregabalin, amitriptyline and lamotrigine. Evidence synthesis and evaluation were performed using the GRADE methodology. This review provided a summary of the evidence on pharmacological supportive care in early rehabilitation of post-acute ischemic stroke patients. This will make it possible to improve current recommendations with the aim of collaborating with health decision-making for this population.
Topics: Humans; Ischemic Stroke; Medicine; Amitriptyline; Antipsychotic Agents; Citalopram
PubMed: 37624681
DOI: No ID Found -
European Review For Medical and... May 2024Painful peripheral diabetic neuropathy (PRDN) is a common disabling condition. Pregabalin and amitriptyline are commonly prescribed as the first-line for PPDN despite... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Painful peripheral diabetic neuropathy (PRDN) is a common disabling condition. Pregabalin and amitriptyline are commonly prescribed as the first-line for PPDN despite the contradicting recommendations. There is a need to inform the scientific community regarding first-line pain control among patients with PPDN. This meta-analysis assessed pregabalin and amitriptyline effects on PPDN.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EBSCO, and Google Scholar; the terms used were amitriptyline, pregabalin, painful diabetic neuropathy, antidepressant, gabapentinoids, quality of life, and adverse events. Boolean operators like AND, and OR were used. Six hundred and thirty-one studies were retrieved, and 37 full texts were screened. However, only six randomized controlled trials fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria.
RESULTS
No significant statistical differences between amitriptyline and pregabalin regarding pain score and significant pain reduction (odd ratio, -0.82, 95% CI, -2.21-0.58, and odd ratio, 1.16, 95% CI, 0.76-1.76 respectively). Quality of life, total adverse events, and drug discontinuation were not different between the two drugs (odd ratio, 0.89, 95% CI, -2.11-3.89, odd ratio, 0.98, 95% CI, 0.52-1.85, and odd ratio, 0.51, 95% CI, 0.08-3.15, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
No significant statistical differences between amitriptyline and pregabalin regarding their effects on pain and quality of life. The drugs showed similar total adverse events and drug withdrawal. Further larger real-world studies are needed.
Topics: Pregabalin; Amitriptyline; Humans; Diabetic Neuropathies; Analgesics; Quality of Life
PubMed: 38856135
DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_202405_36296 -
Neurologia Apr 2023Headache is a frequent reason for consultation between primary care physicians, emergency services physicians, and neurology specialists; however, it is not always well...
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE
Headache is a frequent reason for consultation between primary care physicians, emergency services physicians, and neurology specialists; however, it is not always well managed. The Andalusian Society of Neurology's Headache Study Group (SANCE) aimed to analyse headache management at different levels of care.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
We conducted a descriptive cross-sectional study with data gathered through a retrospective survey in July 2019. Participants completed a series of structured questionnaires on different social and work-related variables from 4 different groups of healthcare professionals (primary care [PC], emergency departments, neurology departments, headache units).
RESULTS
A total of 204 healthcare professionals completed the survey: 35 emergency department physicians, 113 PC physicians, 37 general neurologists, and 19 neurologists specialising in headache. Eighty-five percent of PC physicians reported prescribing preventive drugs, which were maintained for at least 6 months (59%), with flunarizine and amitriptyline being the most commonly used. Most patients attended at neurology consultations (65%) are referred by PC physicians, with changes in the headache pattern being the main reason for referral (74%). Healthcare professionals across all levels of care showed great interest in headache and in receiving training in headache management (97% of PC physicians, 100% of emergency services physicians, 100% of general neurologists).
CONCLUSIONS
Migraine sparks great interest among healthcare professionals from different levels of care. Our results also reveal a lack of resources for headache management, which is reflected in the long waiting times. Other means of bilateral communication between different levels of care should be explored (eg, e-mail).
PubMed: 37120110
DOI: 10.1016/j.nrleng.2023.04.007 -
Mediterranean Journal of Rheumatology Jun 2022Erythromelalgia is a disabling syndrome of paroxysmal vasodilation affecting the feet, hands and face characterised by patient's cooling behaviour to achieve symptom...
Erythromelalgia is a disabling syndrome of paroxysmal vasodilation affecting the feet, hands and face characterised by patient's cooling behaviour to achieve symptom relief. It can be primary or secondary and although a rare disorder it has been described in children and adolescents. We describe the case of a 14-year-old female diagnosed with primary erythromelalgia successfully treated with aspirin, amitriptyline, and carbamazepine.
PubMed: 36128208
DOI: 10.31138/mjr.33.2.256