-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2021Functional Abdominal Pain Disorders (FAPDs) present a considerable burden to paediatric patients, impacting quality of life, school attendance and causing higher rates... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Functional Abdominal Pain Disorders (FAPDs) present a considerable burden to paediatric patients, impacting quality of life, school attendance and causing higher rates of anxiety and depression disorders. There are no international guidelines for the management of this condition. A previous Cochrane Review in 2011 found no evidence to support the use of antidepressants in this context.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the current evidence for the efficacy and safety of antidepressants for FAPDs in children and adolescents.
SEARCH METHODS
In this updated review, we searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and two clinical trial registers from inception until 03 February 2020. We also updated our search of databases of ongoing research, reference lists and 'grey literature' from inception to 03 February 2020.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing antidepressants to placebo, to no treatment or to any other intervention, in children aged 4 to 18 years with a FAPD diagnosis as per the Rome or any other defined criteria (as defined by the authors). The primary outcomes of interest included treatment success (as defined by the authors), pain severity, pain frequency and withdrawal due to adverse events.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors checked all citations independently, resolving disagreement with a third-party arbiter. We reviewed all potential studies in full text, and once again made independent decisions, with disagreements resolved by consensus. We conducted data extraction and 'Risk of bias' assessments independently, following Cochrane methods. Where homogeneous data were available, we performed meta-analysis using a random-effects model. We conducted GRADE analysis.
MAIN RESULTS
We found one new study in this updated search, making a total of three trials (223 participants) eligible for inclusion: two using amitriptyline (AMI) and one using citalopram. For the primary outcome of treatment success, two studies used reports of success on a symptom-based Likert scale, with either a two-point reduction or the two lowest levels defined as success. The third study defined success as a 15% improvement in quality of life (QOL) ratings scales. Therefore, meta-analysis did not include this final study due to the heterogeneity of the outcome measure. There is low-certainty evidence that there may be no difference when antidepressants are compared with placebo (risk ratio (RR) 1.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.87 to 1.56; 2 studies, 205 participants; I = 0%). We downgraded the evidence for significant imprecision due to extremely sparse data (see Summary of findings table 1). The third study reported that participants receiving antidepressants were significantly more likely than those receiving placebo to experience at least a 15% improvement in overall QOL score at 10 and 13 weeks (P = 0.007 and P = 0.002, respectively (absolute figures were not given)). The analysis found no difference in withdrawals due to adverse events between antidepressants and placebo: RR 3.17 (95% CI 0.65 to 15.33), with very low certainty due to high risk of bias in studies and imprecision due to low event and participant numbers. Sensitivity analysis using a fixed-effect model and analysing just for AMI found no change in this result. Due to heterogeneous and limited reporting, no further meta-analysis was possible.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There may be no difference between antidepressants and placebo for treatment success of FAPDs in childhood. There may be no difference in withdrawals due to adverse events, but this is also of low certainty. There is currently no evidence to support clinical decision making regarding the use of these medications. Further studies must consider sample size, homogenous and relevant outcome measures and longer follow up.
Topics: Abdominal Pain; Adolescent; Amitriptyline; Antidepressive Agents, Second-Generation; Antidepressive Agents, Tricyclic; Child; Citalopram; Gastrointestinal Diseases; Humans; Irritable Bowel Syndrome; Placebos; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 33560523
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008013.pub3 -
JAMA Neurology May 2021Mild traumatic brain injury (TBI) is experienced by 55.9 million people globally each year. The symptoms of mild TBI are diverse and sometimes long-lasting, requiring...
IMPORTANCE
Mild traumatic brain injury (TBI) is experienced by 55.9 million people globally each year. The symptoms of mild TBI are diverse and sometimes long-lasting, requiring frequent use of pharmacological interventions to mitigate them. A thorough understanding of the data supporting pharmacological interventions is important for decision-making among clinicians treating this common injury.
OBJECTIVE
To systematically review studies of pharmacological interventions and their associations with symptom burden reduction among patients with mild TBI and to use an evidence-based model to identify potential directions for future research that may aid in clinical decision-making.
EVIDENCE REVIEW
A systematic review was performed in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Search strings modified for the advanced search interfaces of each search engine were developed in consultation with a librarian and included combinations of search terms, such as brain concussion, post-concussion syndrome, mild traumatic brain injury, and pharmacological treatment. Articles published between January 1, 2000, and July 1, 2020, were analyzed. Studies were included if (1) they were clinical studies with discrete analyses of participants with mild TBI or complicated mild TBI, (2) they were assessments of a pharmacological intervention, (3) they included human participants, and (4) they were published in a peer-reviewed journal in the English language. Studies were excluded if the severity of TBI among participants could not be ascertained (ie, inadequate definition of mild TBI) and the inclusion criteria for the study required intracranial hemorrhage. A total of 23 studies examining 20 pharmacological interventions met the inclusion criteria. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias for Randomized Trials (for randomized clinical trials) and the Cochrane Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions (for all other studies). Data were analyzed from June to September 2020.
FINDINGS
A total of 1495 articles were identified; of those, 131 articles were excluded as duplicates. Titles and abstracts were screened for inclusion and exclusion criteria among the remaining 1364 articles, and 134 of those articles received a full-text review. After exclusions, 23 studies (11 randomized clinical trials, 7 prospective observational studies, 3 retrospective observational studies, and 2 case studies) examining 20 pharmacological interventions were identified for inclusion in the systematic review. Studies included 22 distinct participant populations comprising 8277 participants with mild TBI and 45 participants without TBI. Among 23 total studies, 8 studies specifically addressed the pediatric population, 9 studies had a low risk of bias, and 16 studies reported symptom burden reduction. Of the 20 pharmacological interventions examined in the studies, methylphenidate, sertraline hydrochloride, ondansetron, amitriptyline, and melatonin were the only medications included in multiple studies.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
This systematic review found a limited number of high-quality, clinically meaningful studies, particularly among children and individuals in the acute stage of injury; therefore, performing an evidence-based analysis that would inform clinical decision-making was not possible. Future studies are needed to focus on standardizing measures and increasing sample sizes (including large multicenter clinical trials) to generate a body of research that may provide additional options for the treatment of patients with mild TBI.
Topics: Brain Concussion; Brain Injuries, Traumatic; Child; Clinical Decision-Making; Humans; Post-Concussion Syndrome; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 33464290
DOI: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2020.5079 -
CNS Drugs Dec 2020Insomnia is associated with significant comorbidity, disability and impact on quality of life and, despite advances in pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy, remains a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Insomnia is associated with significant comorbidity, disability and impact on quality of life and, despite advances in pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy, remains a significant burden to society. Cannabinoids are gaining acceptance for use as medicines in the treatment of insomnia disorder.
OBJECTIVE
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of cannabinoids in the treatment of insomnia disorder.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of the PubMed, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature Complete databases from inception to 5 December 2019, and again prior to data abstraction, for studies of cannabis-based products for the treatment of insomnia disorder in adults. Inclusion criteria were (1) clinical studies, (2) participants aged ≥ 18 years, (3) insomnia disorder either formally diagnosed against contemporaneous diagnostic criteria or quantified with validated instruments and (4) compared cannabis-based products with the standard of care, placebo or a sedative. No language restrictions were imposed. Non-primary research, animal studies and studies of cannabis-induced insomnia were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2 tool for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies-of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool for non-randomized trials. Heterogeneity was assessed with the I statistic.
RESULTS
A total of five studies (two RCTs and three non-randomised studies) with 219 study participants were included, of which three could be combined. The three non-randomised studies contributed data on the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index Questionnaire score, showing a favourable effect of cannabinoids at ≤ 4 weeks of follow-up (mean difference - 1.89 [95% confidence interval {CI} - 2.68 to - 1.10]; n = 176) and at 8 weeks of follow-up (mean difference - 2.41 [95% CI - 3.36 to - 1.46]; n = 166). One double-blind crossover RCT (n = 32) reported that, compared with amitriptyline, nabilone-a synthetic analogue to tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)-improved Insomnia Severity Index scores after 2 weeks of treatment (adjusted difference - 3.25 [95% CI - 5.26 to - 1.24]) and resulted in a more restful sleep as a sub-measure of the Leeds Sleep Evaluation Questionnaire (LSEQ) (difference 0.48 [95% CI 0.01-0.95]) but with no effect on overall sleep quality as measured by the LSEQ. In a single ascending-dose RCT (n = 9), THC reduced sleep-onset latency compared with placebo at 10 mg, 20 mg and 30 mg doses (mean difference - 43.00 min [95% CI - 82.76 to - 3.24], - 62.00 [95% CI - 103.60 to - 20.40] and - 54.00 [95% CI - 103.93 to - 4.07], respectively). All the included studies were assessed as poor quality, mainly due to small sample sizes, short treatment periods, uncertain clinical significance and high risk of bias.
CONCLUSIONS
Few studies have examined the efficacy of cannabinoids in the treatment of insomnia disorder. Despite some possible signals for efficacy, the heterogeneity of participants, interventions, efficacy outcomes and results, and the high risk of bias across included trials, do not reliably inform evidence-based practice. This review highlights shortcomings in the existing literature, including lack of diagnostic clarity, poorly defined participant groups, non-standardised interventions and studies of inappropriate design, duration and power to detect clinically meaningful outcomes. Further research in the form of high-quality RCTs are required before drawing any conclusions about the efficacy of cannabinoids in the treatment of insomnia disorder.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO registration number, CRD42020161043.
Topics: Adult; Cannabinoids; Humans; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Research Design; Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33244728
DOI: 10.1007/s40263-020-00773-x -
JAMA Psychiatry Mar 2021Precise estimation of the drug metabolism capacity for individual patients is crucial for adequate dose personalization. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Precise estimation of the drug metabolism capacity for individual patients is crucial for adequate dose personalization.
OBJECTIVE
To quantify the difference in the antipsychotic and antidepressant exposure among patients with genetically associated CYP2C19 and CYP2D6 poor (PM), intermediate (IM), and normal (NM) metabolizers.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, Clinicaltrialsregister.eu, ClinicalTrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and CENTRAL databases were screened for studies from January 1, 1990, to June 30, 2020, with no language restrictions.
STUDY SELECTION
Two independent reviewers performed study screening and assessed the following inclusion criteria: (1) appropriate CYP2C19 or CYP2D6 genotyping was performed, (2) genotype-based classification into CYP2C19 or CYP2D6 NM, IM, and PM categories was possible, and (3) 3 patients per metabolizer category were available.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
The Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines were followed for extracting data and quality, validity, and risk of bias assessments. A fixed-effects model was used for pooling the effect sizes of the included studies.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Drug exposure was measured as (1) dose-normalized area under the plasma level (time) curve, (2) dose-normalized steady-state plasma level, or (3) reciprocal apparent total drug clearance. The ratio of means (RoM) was calculated by dividing the mean drug exposure for PM, IM, or pooled PM plus IM categories by the mean drug exposure for the NM category.
RESULTS
Based on the data derived from 94 unique studies and 8379 unique individuals, the most profound differences were observed in the patients treated with aripiprazole (CYP2D6 PM plus IM vs NM RoM, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.41-1.57; 12 studies; 1038 patients), haloperidol lactate (CYP2D6 PM vs NM RoM, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.40-2.02; 9 studies; 423 patients), risperidone (CYP2D6 PM plus IM vs NM RoM, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.28-1.44; 23 studies; 1492 patients), escitalopram oxalate (CYP2C19 PM vs NM, RoM, 2.63; 95% CI, 2.40-2.89; 4 studies; 1262 patients), and sertraline hydrochloride (CYP2C19 IM vs NM RoM, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.27-1.51; 3 studies; 917 patients). Exposure differences were also observed for clozapine, quetiapine fumarate, amitriptyline hydrochloride, mirtazapine, nortriptyline hydrochloride, fluoxetine hydrochloride, fluvoxamine maleate, paroxetine hydrochloride, and venlafaxine hydrochloride; however, these differences were marginal, ambiguous, or based on less than 3 independent studies.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the association between CYP2C19/CYP2D6 genotype and drug levels of several psychiatric drugs was quantified with sufficient precision as to be useful as a scientific foundation for CYP2D6/CYP2C19 genotype-based dosing recommendations.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Antipsychotic Agents; Cytochrome P-450 CYP2C19; Cytochrome P-450 CYP2D6; Humans; Pharmacogenomic Variants
PubMed: 33237321
DOI: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2020.3643 -
Pain and Therapy Jun 2021Peripheral neuropathic pain (PNP) arises either acutely or in the chronic phase of a lesion or disease of the peripheral nervous system and is associated with a notable... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Peripheral neuropathic pain (PNP) arises either acutely or in the chronic phase of a lesion or disease of the peripheral nervous system and is associated with a notable disease burden. The management of PNP is often challenging. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate current evidence, derived from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that have assessed pharmacological interventions for the treatment of PNP due to polyneuropathy (PN).
METHODS
A systematic search of the PubMed database led to the identification of 538 papers, of which 457 were excluded due to not meeting the eligibility criteria, and two articles were identified through screening of the reference lists of the 81 eligible studies. Ultimately, 83 papers were included in this systematic review.
RESULTS
The best available evidence for the management of painful diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) is for amitriptyline, duloxetine, gabapentin, pregabalin and venlafaxine as monotherapies and oxycodone as add-on therapy (level II of evidence). Tramadol appears to be effective when used as a monotherapy and add-on therapy in patients with PN of various etiologies (level II of evidence). Weaker evidence (level III) is available on the effectiveness of several other agents discussed in this review for the management of PNP due to PN.
DISCUSSION
Response to treatment may be affected by the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms that are involved in the pathogenesis of the PN and, therefore, it is very important to thoroughly investigate patients presenting with PNP to determine the causes of this neuropathy. Future RCTs should be conducted to shed more light on the use of pharmacological approaches in patients with other forms of PNP and to design specific treatment algorithms.
PubMed: 33145709
DOI: 10.1007/s40122-020-00210-3 -
The Laryngoscope Jun 2021To evaluate the effectiveness of neuromodulating agents for the management of atypical facial pain and primary facial neuralgias. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the effectiveness of neuromodulating agents for the management of atypical facial pain and primary facial neuralgias.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases for original research articles that examine the effectiveness and adverse reactions of pharmacologic therapy for the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia and atypical facial pain. Studies that included surgical interventions for atypical facial pain or facial pain secondary to other causes were excluded. Meta-analysis was conducted for reductions in symptom scores and adverse effects.
RESULTS
Of 3,409 articles screened, 73 full-text articles were included, consisting of 45 observational studies and 29 randomized controlled trials. Twenty-four different pharmacological agents were assessed; carbamazepine was the most frequently studied while botulinum toxin A demonstrated the highest consistency in reduction of symptom scores. Pooled estimate of three randomized controlled trials revealed that patients with trigeminal neuralgia who received botulinum toxin A had higher odds (odds ratio 7.46; 95% CI 3.53-15.78) of achieving a ≥50% reduction in visual analogue scale scores compared to controls. Pooled estimate of 15 observational studies showed that three-fourths of patients with trigeminal neuralgia who received carbamazepine experienced clinically significant pain reduction (prevalence proportion 0.75; 95% CI 0.66-0.83).
CONCLUSIONS
Patients receiving botulinum toxin A for trigeminal neuralgia had higher odds of achieving ≥50% reduction in pain scores. A significant proportion of patients with trigeminal neuralgia experienced positive response to carbamazepine. There was moderate evidence for amitriptyline in patients with atypical facial pain. Standardization of outcome reporting would facilitate future quantitative comparisons of therapeutic effectiveness. Laryngoscope, 131:1235-1253, 2021.
Topics: Adult; Amitriptyline; Botulinum Toxins, Type A; Carbamazepine; Facial Nerve; Facial Pain; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Neuralgia; Neurotransmitter Agents; Observational Studies as Topic; Odds Ratio; Pain Management; Pain Measurement; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome; Trigeminal Neuralgia
PubMed: 33037835
DOI: 10.1002/lary.29162 -
Progress in Brain Research 2020Visual snow syndrome is a debilitating disorder characterized by tiny flickering dots (like TV static) in the entire visual field and a set of accompanying visual...
BACKGROUND
Visual snow syndrome is a debilitating disorder characterized by tiny flickering dots (like TV static) in the entire visual field and a set of accompanying visual (palinopsia, enhanced entoptic phenomena, photophobia, nyctalopia), nonvisual (e.g. tinnitus) and nonperceptional (e.g. concentration problems, irritability) symptoms. Its pathophysiology is enigmatic and therapy is often frustrating.
OBJECTIVES
To summarize our current understanding of pathophysiology and treatment of visual snow syndrome.
METHODS
A systematic search of PubMed database was performed using the key word "visual snow" and predefined in- and exclusion criteria. The results were stratified into "treatment" and "pathophysiology." Additionally, we conducted a search with the key words "persistent migraine aura" and "persistent visual aura" and screened for mis-diagnosed patients actually fulfilling the criteria for visual snow syndrome. The reference lists of most publications and any other relevant articles known to the authors were also reviewed and added if applicable.
RESULTS
From the 50 original papers found by searching for "visual snow," 21 were included according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Additional four publications came searching for "persistent migraine aura" or "persistent visual aura." Further publications derived from literature references resulting in a total of 20 articles for pathophysiology and 15 for treatment with some overlaps. Regarding pathophysiology, hyperexcitability of the visual cortex and a processing problem of higher order visual function are assumed, but the location is still in discussion. In particular, it is unclear if the primary visual cortex, the visual association cortex or the thalamocortical pathway is involved. Regarding treatment, data is available on a total of 153 VSS patients with medication mentioned for 54 resulting in a total of 136 trials. From the 44 different medications tried, only eight were effective at least once. The best data is available for lamotrigine being effective in 8/36 (22.2%, including one total response and no worsening), followed by topiramate being effective in 2/13 (15.4%, no total response and one worsening). The only other medication resulting in worsening of VSS was amitriptyline according to our literature review. The others reported to be effective at least once were valproate, propranolol, verapamil, baclofen, naproxen and sertraline. The nonpharmacological approach using color filters of the yellow-blue color spectrum might also be helpful in some patients.
CONCLUSIONS
Visual snow syndrome is still far from being fully understood. In respect of pathophysiology, a disorder of visual processing is likely. The best pharmacological evidence exists for lamotrigine, which can be discussed off-label. As nonpharmacological option, patients might benefit from tinted glasses for everyday use.
Topics: Humans; Migraine with Aura; Vision Disorders
PubMed: 33008511
DOI: 10.1016/bs.pbr.2020.05.020 -
Headache Jul 2020Sleep disorders and circadian dysregulation appear to be associated with primary headache disorders. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Sleep disorders and circadian dysregulation appear to be associated with primary headache disorders.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to review the existing evidence for the deployment of melatonin in migraine prophylaxis. Initially, case-control studies investigating nocturnal melatonin and 6-sulphatoxymelatonin (aMT6s, melatonin metabolite discarded by the urine) levels in patients with migraine and healthy controls (HC) would be reviewed and meta-analyzed. Second, results from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies evaluating the use of melatonin in migraine would be synthesized.
METHODS
MEDLINE EMBASE, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, trial registries, Google Scholar, and OpenGrey were comprehensively searched. The quality of studies was assessed according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (case-control studies) and the Risk-of-Bias Cochrane tool (RCTs). Random-effects (RE) or fixed-effects (FE) model was used based on heterogeneity among studies (homogeneity assumed when PQ > 0.1 and I < 30%). Publication bias was assessed by funnel plots.
RESULTS
Literature search provided 11 case-control studies. Evidence was compatible with lower nocturnal serum [5 of 6 studies were synthesized due to deficient reporting of 1 abstract, migraine n = 197, HC n = 132, RE MD = -12.29 pg/ml, 95%CI = (-21.10, -3.49)] and urinary melatonin [3 studies, migraine n = 30, HC n = 29, RE MD = -0.12 nmol/nocturnal (12 hours) urinary collection, 95%CI = (-0.22, -0.03)], as well as urine aMT6s levels [1 study, migraine n = 146, HC n = 74, MD = -11.90 μg/nocturnal (12 hours) urine collection, 95%CI = (-19.23, -4.57)] in adult migraine patients compared to HC [1 study involving children did not reveal any difference regarding nocturnal urine aMT6s, n = 18 per group, MD = -6.00 μg/nocturnal (12 hours) urine collection, 95%CI = (-21.19, 9.19)]. Regarding the treatment-prevention of migraine, 7 RCTs and 9 non-randomized studies were retrieved. Data synthesis was not feasible for the comparison of melatonin and placebo due to the existing clinical and methodological heterogeneity of the 5 relevant RCTs. Overall, melatonin was more efficacious and equally safe with placebo in the prevention of migraine in adults (3 of 4 RCTs provided superior efficacy results for melatonin, 1 RCT revealed no difference regarding Headache Frequency -HF-), while there are limited data for children (1 RCT revealed no difference against placebo regarding HF). Additionally, no difference was revealed between melatonin and amitriptyline (1 RCT), sodium valproate (1 RCT) or propranolol (1 non-randomized study) with respect to their efficacy in adults with migraine, while melatonin was more effective than pizotifen (1 RCT). In children with migraine, amitriptyline is more efficacious regarding most assessed parameters (2 studies, n = 85 per group, HF: RE MD = 4.03, 95%CI = (2.64, 5.42), Headache Duration: RE MD = 0.72, 95%CI = (0.41, 1.03), Headache Severity: FE MD = 1.57, 95%CI = (1.13, 2.00), Response to Treatment: FE MD = 0.33, 95%CI = (0.16, 0.69), Headache Induced Disability Severity: RE MD = 6.07, 95%CI = (-11.87, 24.01 ), Analgesic Consumption - assessed in 1 study, n = 40 per group - MD = 1.11, 95%CI = (-0.10, 2.32)), although melatonin presents a superior safety profile than amitriptyline both in adults and in children.
CONCLUSIONS
Melatonin may be of potential benefit in the treatment-prevention of migraine in adults, but complementary evidence from high-quality RCTs is required.
Topics: Adult; Child; Humans; Melatonin; Migraine Disorders
PubMed: 32352572
DOI: 10.1111/head.13828 -
Journal of Affective Disorders Apr 2020The efficacy ranking of antidepressants for post-stroke depression (PSD) has not been assessed thoroughly yet due to the lack of network meta-analyses with sufficiently... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The efficacy ranking of antidepressants for post-stroke depression (PSD) has not been assessed thoroughly yet due to the lack of network meta-analyses with sufficiently large sample size.
METHODS
Seven databases including PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, CBM, CNKI, WanFang and VIP were systematically searched for eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) regarding nine antidepressants (citalopram, escitalopram, venlafaxine, paroxetine, duloxetine, amitriptyline, doxepin, sertraline and mirtazapine) treating PSD patients. Stata 15 software and R software were utilized for statistical analyses.
RESULTS
51 RCTs were included in this NMA. For the key efficacy outcomes, escitalopram, mirtazapine, sertraline, citalopram, venlafaxine and paroxetine were associated with larger reduction of the Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD) total score compared with placebo at 2 weeks. Among the nine antidepressants, escitalopram ranked the best while amitriptyline was the least helpful. At 4 weeks, citalopram ranked higher than placebo and the other eight antidepressants. In contrast, amitriptyline and doxepin were associated with minimal reduction of HAMD score. At 8 weeks, changes in HAMD score were significantly greater in nine antidepressants groups compared to placebo group. Besides, mirtazapine ranked higher than citalopram and escitalopram. At endpoint, mirtazapine was related to the highest response rate, followed by venlafaxine and escitalopram, respectively.
LIMITATIONS
No restriction was imposed on doses of every antidepressant.
CONCLUSIONS
Escitalopram was associated with a quicker relief of depression, but mirtazapine was probably the best option when it comes to the efficacy of 8-week treatment duration. Amitriptyline and doxepin were nearly the worst choice regardless of the duration (2, 4 or 8 weeks).
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; China; Citalopram; Depression; Depressive Disorder, Major; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Stroke; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32056924
DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2020.02.005 -
Headache Sep 2019To provide updated evidence-based recommendations for migraine prevention using pharmacologic treatment with or without cognitive behavioral therapy in the pediatric...
Practice guideline update summary: Pharmacologic treatment for pediatric migraine prevention: Report of the Guideline Development, Dissemination, and Implementation Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the American Headache Society.
OBJECTIVE
To provide updated evidence-based recommendations for migraine prevention using pharmacologic treatment with or without cognitive behavioral therapy in the pediatric population.
METHODS
The authors systematically reviewed literature from January 2003 to August 2017 and developed practice recommendations using the American Academy of Neurology 2011 process, as amended.
RESULTS
Fifteen class I-III studies on migraine prevention in children in adolescents met inclusion criteria. There is insufficient evidence to determine if children and adolescents receiving divalproex, onabotulinumtoxinA, amitriptyline, nimodipine and flunarizine are more or less likely than those receiving placebo to have a reduction in headache frequency. Children with migraine receiving propranolol are possibly more likely than those receiving placebo to have an at least 50% reduction in headache frequency. Children and adolescents receiving topiramate and cinnarizine are probably more likely than those receiving placebo to have a decrease in headache frequency. Children with migraine receiving amitriptyline plus cognitive behavioral therapy are more likely than those receiving amitriptyline plus headache education to have a reduction in headache frequency. Recommendations The majority of randomized controlled trials studying the efficacy of preventive medications for pediatric migraine fail to demonstrate superiority to placebo. Recommendations for the prevention of migraine in children include counseling on lifestyle and behavioral factors that influence headache frequency, and assessment and management of comorbid disorders associated with headache persistence. Clinicians should engage in shared decision making with patients and caregivers regarding the use of preventive treatments for migraine, including discussion of the limitations in the evidence to support pharmacologic treatments.
Topics: Adolescent; Analgesics; Child; Evidence-Based Medicine; Female; Humans; Male; Migraine Disorders; Pain Management
PubMed: 31529477
DOI: 10.1111/head.13625