-
Cureus Aug 2023This meta-analysis was conducted to assess the effectiveness of topical anesthetics in preventing premature ejaculation. We conducted an online database search for... (Review)
Review
This meta-analysis was conducted to assess the effectiveness of topical anesthetics in preventing premature ejaculation. We conducted an online database search for original studies comparing topical anesthetic agents with placebo in patients with premature ejaculation. After selecting relevant articles, we extracted data on baseline characteristics and predetermined endpoints. Intravaginal ejaculatory latency time (IELT) was the primary outcome for efficacy. Mean differences and corresponding 95% confidence intervals were used to present continuous data. A random-effects model was used to pool the data, and subgroup analysis was performed based on the type of anesthetic agent used. Eleven randomized controlled trials were examined, involving a total of 2008 participants. After analyzing the combined results, it was found that Severance Secret (SS) cream (CJ CheilJedang Corporation, Seoul, South Korea) demonstrated significantly higher effectiveness than a placebo in increasing IELT (P = 0.001). Similarly, the topical eutectic mixture for premature ejaculation (TEMPE), lidocaine, and the eutectic mixture of local anesthetics (EMLA) were significantly more efficient than a placebo (P<0.00001; P = 0.0001; P<0.00001). Additionally, it was found that lidocaine gel was more efficient than paroxetine or sildenafil (P = 0.04; P<0.00001). In conclusion, topical anesthetics increase IELT in men with premature ejaculation more effectively than placebo, sildenafil, tadalafil, paroxetine, and dapoxetine.
PubMed: 37664322
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.42913 -
European Journal of Investigation in... Aug 2023This review aimed to investigate the metabolic alterations associated with psychopharmacological treatment of neuropsychiatric disorders, which can significantly impact... (Review)
Review
This review aimed to investigate the metabolic alterations associated with psychopharmacological treatment of neuropsychiatric disorders, which can significantly impact patients' physical health and overall quality of life. The study utilized the PRISMA methodology and included cross-sectional, retrospective studies, and randomized clinical trials from reputable databases like SCOPUS, CLARIVATE, SCIENCE DIRECT, and PUBMED. Out of the 64 selected studies, various psychotropic drug classes were analyzed, including antidepressants, anticonvulsants, and antipsychotics. Among the antidepressants, such as amitriptyline, Imipramine, and clomipramine, weight gain, constipation, and cardiovascular effects were the most commonly reported metabolic adverse effects. SSRI antidepressants like Fluoxetine, Sertraline, Citalopram, Escitalopram, and Paroxetine exhibited a high prevalence of gastrointestinal and cardiac alterations. Regarding anticonvulsants, valproic acid and Fosphenytoin were associated with adverse reactions such as weight gain and disturbances in appetite and sleep patterns. As for antipsychotics, drugs like Clozapine, Olanzapine, and Risperidone were linked to weight gain, diabetes, and deterioration of the lipid profile. The findings of this review emphasize the importance of continuous monitoring for adverse effects, particularly considering that the metabolic changes caused by psychopharmacological medications may vary depending on the age of the patients. Future research should focus on conducting field studies to further expand knowledge on the metabolic effects of other commonly prescribed psychotropic drugs. Overall, the study highlights the significance of understanding and managing metabolic alterations induced by psychopharmacological treatment to enhance patient care and well-being.
PubMed: 37623307
DOI: 10.3390/ejihpe13080110 -
Frontiers in Psychiatry 2023Vasomotor symptoms, or hot flashes, are among the most common complaints for menopausal and postmenopausal women. As an alternative to hormone replacement therapy,...
INTRODUCTION
Vasomotor symptoms, or hot flashes, are among the most common complaints for menopausal and postmenopausal women. As an alternative to hormone replacement therapy, paroxetine mesylate became the only non-hormonal treatment approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), despite limited evidence for its efficacy. More specifically, there is uncertainty around paroxetine's unique benefit and the magnitude of the placebo response in clinical trials of paroxetine.
METHODS
Relevant databases were searched to identify randomized clinical trials examining the efficacy of paroxetine to treat hot flashes. The primary outcomes of interest were hot flash frequency and hot flash severity scores. Data was extracted from the published results, and risk of bias assessments were conducted.
RESULTS
Six randomized clinical trials that included a total of 1,486 women were coded and analyzed. The results demonstrated that 79% of the mean treatment response for hot flash frequency is accounted for by a placebo response, resulting in a mean true drug effect of 21% at most. Additionally, 68% of the mean treatment response for hot flash severity is accounted for by a placebo response, resulting in a maximum true drug effect of 32%.
DISCUSSION
The results herein call into question the actual efficacy of the only FDA approved, non-hormonal treatment for hot flashes by demonstrating that a placebo response accounts for the majority of treatment responses for reductions in both hot flash frequency and severity. The findings provide evidence to reevaluate the use of paroxetine to treat postmenopausal hot flashes and emphasize the importance of considering effective, alternative treatments for vasomotor symptoms.
PubMed: 37599891
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1204163 -
BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care Sep 2023Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is a very common symptom in patients with cancer, and one of the five areas of highest priority in cancer research. There is currently no... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is a very common symptom in patients with cancer, and one of the five areas of highest priority in cancer research. There is currently no consensus on pharmacologic interventions for treating CRF. The aim of this systematic review is to provide more clarity on which pharmacologic interventions may be most promising, for future clinical trials. The network meta-analysis provides the ability to compare multiple agents when no direct head-to-head trials of all agents have been performed.
METHODS
Medline (PubMed), EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched up until 5 March 2021. Studies were included if they reported on a pharmacologic intervention for CRF. Standardised mean differences and corresponding 95% CIs were computed using a random-effects maximum-likelihood model.
RESULTS
This review reports on 18 studies and 2604 patients, the most comprehensive review of pharmacologic interventions for CRF at the time of this publication. Methylphenidate, modafinil and paroxetine were superior to placebo. Methylphenidate and modafinil were equivalent to one another. Paroxetine was superior to modafinil.
CONCLUSION
Paroxetine should be further studied in future trials. As well, more safety data are needed on pharmacologic interventions.
Topics: Humans; Modafinil; Central Nervous System Stimulants; Paroxetine; Network Meta-Analysis; Methylphenidate; Fatigue; Neoplasms
PubMed: 34593386
DOI: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2021-003244