Banzi Rita, Cusi Cristina, Randazzo Concetta, Sterzi Roberto, Tedesco Dario, Moja Lorenzo
Laboratory of Regulatory Policies, IRCCS - Mario Negri Institute for Pharmacological Research, via G La Masa 19, Milan, Italy, 20156.
Out Patient Services - Neurology, Istituti Clinici di Perfezionamento, Milano, Italy
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 May 1;2015(5):CD011681. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011681.
This is an updated version of the Cochrane review published in 2005 on selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors (SSRIs) for preventing migraine and tension-type headache. The original review has been split in two parts and this review now only regards tension-type headache prevention. Another updated review covers migraine. Tension-type headache is the second most common disorder worldwide and has high social and economic relevance. As serotonin and other neurotransmitters may have a role in pain mechanisms, SSRIs and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) have been evaluated for the prevention of tension-type headache.
To determine the efficacy and tolerability of SSRIs and SNRIs compared to placebo and other active interventions in the prevention of episodic and chronic tension-type headache in adults.
For the original review, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2003, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1966 to January 2004), EMBASE (1994 to May 2003), and Headache Quarterly (1990 to 2003). For this update, we revised the original search strategy to reflect the broader type of intervention (SSRIs and SNRIs). We searched CENTRAL (2014, Issue 10) on the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (1946 to November 2014), EMBASE (1980 to November 2014), and PsycINFO (1987 to November 2014). We also checked the reference lists of retrieved articles and searched trial registries for ongoing trials.
We included randomised controlled trials comparing SSRIs or SNRIs with any type of control intervention in participants 18 years and older, of either sex, with tension-type headache.
Two authors independently extracted data (headache frequency, index, intensity, and duration; use of symptomatic/analgesic medication; quality of life; and withdrawals) and assessed the risk of bias of trials. The primary outcome is tension-type headache frequency, measured by the number of headache attacks or the number of days with headache per evaluation period.
The original review included six studies on tension-type headache. We now include eight studies with a total of 412 participants with chronic forms of tension-type headache. These studies evaluated five SSRIs (citalopram, sertraline, fluoxetine, paroxetine, fluvoxamine) and one SNRI (venlafaxine). The two new studies included in this update are placebo controlled trials, one evaluated sertraline and one venlafaxine. Six studies, already included in the previous version of this review, compared SSRIs to other antidepressants (amitriptyline, desipramine, sulpiride, mianserin). Most of the included studies had methodological and/or reporting shortcomings and lacked adequate power. Follow-up ranged between two and four months.Six studies explored the effect of SSRIs or SNRIs on tension-type headache frequency, the primary endpoint. At eight weeks of follow-up, we found no difference when compared to placebo (two studies, N = 127; mean difference (MD) -0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.95 to 2.03; I(2)= 0%) or amitriptyline (two studies, N = 152; MD 0.76, 95% CI -2.05 to 3.57; I(2)= 44%).When considering secondary outcomes, SSRIs reduce the symptomatic/analgesic medication use for acute headache attacks compared to placebo (two studies, N = 118; MD -1.87, 95% CI -2.09 to -1.65; I(2)= 0%). However, amitriptyline appeared to reduce the intake of analgesic more efficiently than SSRIs (MD 4.98, 95% CI 1.12 to 8.84; I(2)= 0%). The studies supporting these findings were considered at unclear risk of bias. We found no differences compared to placebo or other antidepressants in headache duration and intensity.SSRIs or SNRI were generally more tolerable than tricyclics. However, the two groups did not differ in terms of number of participants who withdrew due to adverse events or for other reasons (four studies, N = 257; odds ratio (OR) 1.04; 95% CI 0.41 to 2.60; I(2)= 25% and OR 1.55, 95% CI 0.71 to 3.38; I(2)= 0%).We did not find any study comparing SSRIs or SNRIs with pharmacological treatments other than antidepressants (e.g. botulinum toxin) or non-drug therapies (e.g. psycho-behavioural treatments, manual therapy, acupuncture).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Since the last version of this review, the new included studies have not added high quality evidence to support the use of SSRIs or venlafaxine (a SNRI) as preventive drugs for tension-type headache. Over two months of treatment, SSRIs or venlafaxine are no more effective than placebo or amitriptyline in reducing headache frequency in patients with chronic tension-type headache. SSRIs seem to be less effective than tricyclic antidepressants in terms of intake of analgesic medications. Tricyclic antidepressants are associated with more adverse events; however, this did not cause a greater number of withdrawals. No reliable information is available at longer follow-up. Our conclusion is that the use of SSRIs and venlafaxine for the prevention of chronic tension-type headache is not supported by evidence.
这是2005年发表的关于选择性5-羟色胺再摄取抑制剂(SSRI)预防偏头痛和紧张型头痛的Cochrane综述的更新版本。原综述已分为两部分,本综述现仅涉及紧张型头痛的预防。另一篇更新综述涵盖偏头痛。紧张型头痛是全球第二常见的疾病,具有高度的社会和经济相关性。由于5-羟色胺和其他神经递质可能在疼痛机制中起作用,已对SSRI和5-羟色胺-去甲肾上腺素再摄取抑制剂(SNRI)进行了预防紧张型头痛的评估。
确定与安慰剂及其他有效干预措施相比,SSRI和SNRI在预防成人发作性和慢性紧张型头痛方面的疗效和耐受性。
在原综述中,我们检索了Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL 2003年第4期)、MEDLINE(1966年至2004年1月)、EMBASE(1994年至2003年5月)和《头痛季刊》(1990年至2003年)。对于此次更新,我们修订了原检索策略,以反映更广泛的干预类型(SSRI和SNRI)。我们检索了Cochrane图书馆中的CENTRAL(2014年第10期)、MEDLINE(1946年至2014年11月)、EMBASE(1980年至2014年11月)和PsycINFO(1987年至2014年11月)。我们还检查了检索到的文章的参考文献列表,并在试验注册库中搜索正在进行的试验。
我们纳入了将SSRI或SNRI与任何类型的对照干预措施进行比较的随机对照试验,参与者为18岁及以上、患有紧张型头痛的男女。
两位作者独立提取数据(头痛频率、指数、强度和持续时间;对症/止痛药物的使用;生活质量;以及退出情况),并评估试验的偏倚风险。主要结局是紧张型头痛频率,通过每个评估期的头痛发作次数或头痛天数来衡量。
原综述纳入了六项关于紧张型头痛的研究。我们现在纳入了八项研究,共有412名患有慢性紧张型头痛的参与者。这些研究评估了五种SSRI(西酞普兰、舍曲林、氟西汀、帕罗西汀、氟伏沙明)和一种SNRI(文拉法辛)。此次更新中纳入的两项新研究是安慰剂对照试验,一项评估了舍曲林,另一项评估了文拉法辛。本综述上一版本中已纳入的六项研究将SSRI与其他抗抑郁药(阿米替林、地昔帕明、舒必利、米安色林)进行了比较。大多数纳入的研究存在方法学和/或报告方面的缺陷,且缺乏足够的效力。随访时间为两到四个月。六项研究探讨了SSRI或SNRI对紧张型头痛频率这一主要终点的影响。在随访八周时,与安慰剂相比(两项研究,N = 127;平均差(MD)-0.96,95%置信区间(CI)-3.95至2.03;I² = 0%)或与阿米替林相比(两项研究,N = 152;MD 0.76,95%CI -2.05至3.57;I² = 44%),我们未发现差异。在考虑次要结局时,与安慰剂相比,SSRI减少了急性头痛发作的对症/止痛药物使用(两项研究,N = 118;MD -1.87,95%CI -2.09至-1.65;I² = 0%)。然而,阿米替林似乎比SSRI更有效地减少了镇痛药的摄入量(MD 4.98,95%CI 1.12至8.84;I² = 0%)。支持这些发现的研究被认为存在偏倚风险不明确的情况。与安慰剂或其他抗抑郁药相比,我们在头痛持续时间和强度方面未发现差异。SSRI或SNRI通常比三环类药物更具耐受性。然而,两组因不良事件或其他原因退出的参与者数量没有差异(四项研究,N = 257;优势比(OR)1.04;95%CI 0.41至2.60;I² = 25%,OR 1.55,95%CI 0.71至3.38;I² = 0%)。我们未发现任何将SSRI或SNRI与除抗抑郁药以外的其他药物治疗(如肉毒杆菌毒素)或非药物疗法(如心理行为治疗、手法治疗、针灸)进行比较的研究。
自本综述的上一版本以来,新纳入的研究并未增加高质量证据来支持使用SSRI或文拉法辛(一种SNRI)作为紧张型头痛的预防性药物。在超过两个月的治疗中,SSRI或文拉法辛在减少慢性紧张型头痛患者的头痛频率方面并不比安慰剂或阿米替林更有效。在镇痛药摄入量方面,SSRI似乎比三环类抗抑郁药效果更差。三环类抗抑郁药与更多不良事件相关;然而,这并未导致更多的退出情况。在更长的随访期内没有可靠的信息。我们的结论是,证据不支持使用SSRI和文拉法辛预防慢性紧张型头痛。