Suppr超能文献

氨磺必利与利培酮治疗精神分裂症患者的对照研究:台湾地区一项双盲试验性研究

Amisulpride versus risperidone in the treatment of schizophrenic patients: a double-blind pilot study in Taiwan.

作者信息

Hwang Tzung J, Lee Shin-Min, Sun Hsiao-Ju, Lin Hsin-Nan, Tsai Shih-Jen, Lee Ying-Chiao, Chen Ying-Sheue

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.

出版信息

J Formos Med Assoc. 2003 Jan;102(1):30-6.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The atypical antipsychotics, amisulpride and risperidone, have different receptor affinity characteristics. Although the relative efficacy of both drugs compared to conventional antipsychotics is well established, it remains unclear how the efficacy of amisulpride compares with risperidone. There have been no controlled studies comparing amisulpride to risperidone in Asian patients. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of amisulpride with that of risperidone in Taiwanese schizophrenic patients.

METHODS

Patients with productive positive symptoms (n = 48) were enrolled into this double-blind, randomized pilot study for 6 weeks. Patients received either amisulpride (400-800 mg/day) or risperidone (4-8 mg/day). Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), Clinical Global Impression (CGI), Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale (SOFAS), and patients' subjective responses to treatment were assessed during the trial period. Adverse events were recorded at each follow-up visit.

RESULTS

At the end of the trial, the mean dosage was 630 +/- 134 mg/day and 6.88 +/- 1.54 mg/day for amisulpride and risperidone, respectively. There was no significant difference in the reduction of the PANSS total score (amisulpride -24.1 versus risperidone -28.4, p = 0.999), the PANSS positive subscale score (amisulpride -6.8 versus risperidone -8.3, p = 0.467), the PANSS negative subscale score (amisulpride -5.6 versus risperidone -6.4, p = 0.999), or the CGI score between the two groups. The extrapyramidal symptom ratings, the improvement in the SOFAS (amisulpride 11.1 versus risperidone 10.0) and the subjective response (amisulpride 82% versus risperidone 83%) were comparable. No serious adverse events were recorded in either treatment group. There was a statistically significant body weight gain in the risperidone group. In contrast, there was a statistically, though not clinically, significant reduction of blood pressure and heart rate in the amisulpride group.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that amisulpride is as effective as risperidone in the treatment of patients with schizophrenia. Both drugs were well tolerated, but had different side effect profiles.

摘要

背景与目的

非典型抗精神病药物氨磺必利和利培酮具有不同的受体亲和力特征。尽管与传统抗精神病药物相比,这两种药物的相对疗效已得到充分证实,但氨磺必利与利培酮的疗效对比仍不明确。尚无在亚洲患者中比较氨磺必利和利培酮的对照研究。本研究旨在比较氨磺必利与利培酮在台湾精神分裂症患者中的疗效和安全性。

方法

有明显阳性症状的患者(n = 48)被纳入这项为期6周的双盲随机试验研究。患者分别接受氨磺必利(400 - 800毫克/天)或利培酮(4 - 8毫克/天)治疗。在试验期间评估阳性与阴性症状量表(PANSS)、临床总体印象量表(CGI)、社会和职业功能评估量表(SOFAS)以及患者对治疗的主观反应。每次随访时记录不良事件。

结果

试验结束时,氨磺必利和利培酮的平均剂量分别为630±134毫克/天和6.88±1.54毫克/天。两组在PANSS总分降低(氨磺必利-24.1对比利培酮-28.4,p = 0.999)、PANSS阳性分量表评分(氨磺必利-6.8对比利培酮-8.3,p = 0.467)、PANSS阴性分量表评分(氨磺必利-5.6对比利培酮-6.4,p = 0.999)或CGI评分方面均无显著差异。锥体外系症状评分、SOFAS的改善情况(氨磺必利11.1对比利培酮10.0)以及主观反应(氨磺必利82%对比利培酮83%)相当。两个治疗组均未记录到严重不良事件。利培酮组有统计学意义的体重增加。相比之下,氨磺必利组血压和心率有统计学意义但无临床意义的降低。

结论

本研究表明氨磺必利在治疗精神分裂症患者方面与利培酮疗效相当。两种药物耐受性均良好,但副作用情况不同。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验