Department of Clinical Psychopharmacology and Neurotoxicology, National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences, Bangalore, India.
J Clin Psychiatry. 2021 Jun 1;82(3):21f14095. doi: 10.4088/JCP.21f14095.
-Blockers (BBs) are prescribed to a wide range of patients with cardiovascular and neuropsychiatric disorders. For more than half a century, BB treatment has been associated with depression as an adverse effect. The evidence in support of this association includes case reports, observational studies, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However, a large number of studies that refute the association have also been published. A very large meta-analysis of the psychiatric adverse effects of BBs, as reported in RCTs, was recently published. This meta-analysis found that BBs were not associated with an increased risk of depression or of withdrawal due to depression in comparison with either placebo or active controls. However, BBs were associated with an increased risk of fatigue/tiredness in comparison with placebo as well as in comparison with some groups of active controls. BBs were additionally associated with an increased risk of unusual dreams, relative to placebo. These findings suggest that fatigue/tiredness and unusual dreams may be misinterpreted by patients and clinicians as depression, explaining why BBs have been associated with depression risk. Furthermore, because BBs are commonly prescribed to patients with ischemic heart disease (IHD), and because IHD patients are at increased risk of depression, confounding by indication may explain why some patients treated with BBs later develop depression. These considerations notwithstanding, there are many reasons why the findings of the meta-analysis cannot be taken as reassurance on the subject. As examples, the RCTs in the meta-analysis mostly ascertained depression as a symptom rather than as a clinical diagnosis; and the meta-analysis did not consider risks with specific BBs such as propranolol, which has been strongly associated with the risk of depression in previous studies. In short, the final word, perhaps, remains to be said.
阻滞剂 (BBs) 被广泛用于心血管和神经精神疾病患者。半个多世纪以来,BB 治疗一直与抑郁等不良反应相关。支持这种关联的证据包括病例报告、观察性研究和随机对照试验 (RCT)。然而,也发表了大量反驳这种关联的研究。最近发表了一项关于 RCT 报告的 BB 类药物精神不良反应的大型荟萃分析。该荟萃分析发现,与安慰剂或活性对照相比,BB 类药物与抑郁或因抑郁而停药的风险增加无关。然而,与安慰剂相比,BB 类药物与疲劳/乏力的风险增加有关,与某些活性对照组相比也是如此。与安慰剂相比,BB 类药物还与不寻常梦境的风险增加有关。这些发现表明,疲劳/乏力和不寻常梦境可能被患者和临床医生误解为抑郁,这也解释了为什么 BB 类药物与抑郁风险相关。此外,由于 BB 类药物通常被开给缺血性心脏病 (IHD) 患者,而 IHD 患者患抑郁的风险增加,因此指示性混淆可能解释了为什么一些接受 BB 类药物治疗的患者后来会出现抑郁。尽管如此,有很多原因使得荟萃分析的结果不能被视为对此主题的保证。例如,荟萃分析中的 RCT 主要确定抑郁是一种症状,而不是一种临床诊断;而且荟萃分析没有考虑到某些 BB 类药物的风险,如普萘洛尔,以前的研究强烈表明其与抑郁风险相关。简而言之,也许最终的结论仍然有待得出。