Department of Psychiatry, Erasmus Medical Center, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
J Psychiatr Res. 2013 Oct;47(10):1337-42. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2013.05.029. Epub 2013 Jun 22.
To compare the efficacy of plasma level-targeted dose imipramine and high-dose venlafaxine in depressed inpatients in a randomized double-blind study.
The study included 85 patients with a diagnosis of major depressive episode according to the DSM IV criteria and a 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) score ≥ 17. Patients were randomized to imipramine or venlafaxine. The dose of imipramine was adjusted for each patient to a predefined blood level of 200-300 ng/ml. The dose of venlafaxine was increased gradually to 300-375 mg/day. Efficacy was evaluated after 7 weeks of treatment.
The mean age of the study group was 54.5 (range 29-82) years. There was no significant difference according to the primary outcome criterion of a ≥50% reduction on the HAM-D score: 17 of 43 (39.5%) patients on imipramine were responders compared to 21 of 42 (50%) patients on venlafaxine. When considering remission as outcome criterion (HAM-D score ≤ 7), 10 of 43 (23.3%) patients on imipramine were remitters compared to 15 of 42 (35.7%) patients on venlafaxine; again, no significant difference. When analysing a subpopulation of patients without psychotic features, with remission as outcome criterion, a significant difference was found: 5 of 34 (14.7%) patients on imipramine were remitters compared to 12 of 31 (38.7%) patients on venlafaxine.
The present study used optimal doses in depressed inpatients and showed that venlafaxine is at least equal in efficacy to imipramine. The results in the subgroup without psychotic features indicate a possible superiority of venlafaxine.
在一项随机双盲研究中,比较血浆水平靶向剂量丙咪嗪和高剂量文拉法辛治疗住院抑郁症患者的疗效。
该研究纳入了 85 名根据 DSM-IV 标准诊断为重度抑郁发作和汉密尔顿抑郁量表(HAM-D)评分≥17 分的患者。患者随机分为丙咪嗪或文拉法辛组。丙咪嗪的剂量根据每位患者的情况调整至 200-300ng/ml 的预定血药浓度。文拉法辛的剂量逐渐增加至 300-375mg/天。治疗 7 周后评估疗效。
研究组的平均年龄为 54.5 岁(范围 29-82 岁)。根据 HAM-D 评分降低≥50%的主要疗效标准,两组之间无显著差异:丙咪嗪组 43 例患者中有 17 例(39.5%)为有效者,文拉法辛组 42 例患者中有 21 例(50%)为有效者。当以缓解作为疗效标准(HAM-D 评分≤7)时,丙咪嗪组 43 例患者中有 10 例(23.3%)为缓解者,文拉法辛组 42 例患者中有 15 例(35.7%)为缓解者;同样,两组之间无显著差异。当分析无精神病特征的亚组患者时,以缓解作为疗效标准,发现两组之间存在显著差异:丙咪嗪组 34 例患者中有 5 例(14.7%)为缓解者,文拉法辛组 31 例患者中有 12 例(38.7%)为缓解者。
本研究使用了最优剂量治疗住院抑郁症患者,结果显示文拉法辛的疗效至少与丙咪嗪相当。无精神病特征亚组的结果表明文拉法辛可能具有优势。