Yan Jin-Zhu, Liu Jia-Ling, Li Xiao-Zheng, Zhang Zhi-Xin, Liu Run-Ben, Zhang Chao, Gong Qin-Qin
Department of Obstetrics, Taihe Hospital, Hubei University of Medicine, Shiyan, China.
Center for Evidence-Based Medicine and Clinical Research, Taihe Hospital, Hubei University of Medicine, Shiyan, China.
Front Pharmacol. 2022 Jan 18;12:805354. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2021.805354. eCollection 2021.
This study assessed the efficacy, acceptability, and safety of pharmaceutical management for combat-related post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) to provide a clinical decision-making basis for clinicians. A comprehensive search was conducted using Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and Web of Science for randomized controlled trails (RCTs), which reported pharmaceutical management and placobo for adults with combat-related PTSD, that were published until April 21, 2021. The effectiveness, acceptability, and adverse events (AEs), were designed as interested outcomes. The change in total symptoms of combat-related PTSD according to the clinician rating scale was defined as primary outcome, and the others were defined as secondary outcomes. Twenty-two RCTs with 1,221 patients were involved. Compared with placebo, overall active comparators had statistical differences for all outcomes, including the change in total symptoms of combat-related PTSD [SMD = -0.36, 95%CI (-0.62,-0.09)], depression [SMD = -0.28, 95%CI (-0.45,-0.10)], anxiety [SMD = -0.44, 95%CI (-0.64,-0.23)], re-experience [SMD = -0.33, 95%CI (-0.52,-0.13)], avoidance [SMD = -0.24, 95%CI (-0.43,-0.05)], and hyper-arousal [SMD = -0.26, 95%CI (-0.48,-0.03)]. Compared with the placebo, in terms of acceptability, overall active comparators did not significantly decrease all-cause discontinuance rates [RR = 0.97, 95%CI (0.78,1.20)], and the significance decreased due to AEs [RR = 2.42, 95%CI (1.41,4.13)]. Nevertheless, overall there was no statistically significant difference for overall AEs, including somnolence, sedation, dizziness, paresthesia, anxiety, blurred vision, generalized anxiety disorder, and sleep disturbance. All funnel plots were symmetrical and no publication bias was found. Active drugs, especially amitriptyline, imipramine, and quetiapine, had a positive effect on the improvement of combat-related PTSD symptoms. Despite there being no significant increase in the AEs of the active drugs, the fact that the discontinuation rates of these drugs, including risperidone, imipramine, and topiramate, were increased deserves attention. Furthermore, as active drugs were effective across ethnic groups and battlefields, active drug regimens were revealed to be more appropriate for treating people with symptoms of extreme severe PTSD (≥80) or PTSD that is at least 8 weeks old. In addition, current evidence was from adults under 60 years of age and male combat-related PTSD. Whether this evidence can be extended to other populations of combat-related PTSD needs to be confirmed by subsequent high-quality, large-sample studies.
本研究评估了药物治疗与战斗相关创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)的疗效、可接受性和安全性,为临床医生提供临床决策依据。使用Ovid MEDLINE、Ovid EMBASE、Cochrane图书馆、Scopus、ScienceDirect和Web of Science对随机对照试验(RCT)进行全面检索,这些试验报告了针对患有与战斗相关PTSD的成年人的药物治疗和安慰剂治疗情况,检索截至2021年4月21日发表的文献。将有效性、可接受性和不良事件(AE)作为感兴趣的结局。根据临床医生评定量表,与战斗相关PTSD的总症状变化定义为主要结局,其他定义为次要结局。纳入了22项RCT,共1221例患者。与安慰剂相比,总体活性对照药物在所有结局方面均有统计学差异,包括与战斗相关PTSD的总症状变化[标准化均数差(SMD)=-0.36,95%置信区间(CI)(-0.62,-0.09)]、抑郁[SMD=-0.28,95%CI(-0.45,-0.10)]、焦虑[SMD=-0.44,95%CI(-0.64,-0.23)]、再体验[SMD=-0.33,95%CI(-0.52,-0.13)]、回避[SMD=-0.24,95%CI(-0.43,-0.05)]和过度觉醒[SMD=-0.26,95%CI(-0.48,-0.03)]。与安慰剂相比,在可接受性方面,总体活性对照药物并未显著降低全因停药率[风险比(RR)=0.97,95%CI(0.78,1.20)],因AE导致的停药率显著增加[RR=2.42,95%CI(1.41,4.13)]。然而,总体而言,包括嗜睡、镇静、头晕、感觉异常、焦虑、视力模糊、广泛性焦虑障碍和睡眠障碍在内的总体AE无统计学显著差异。所有漏斗图均对称,未发现发表偏倚。活性药物,尤其是阿米替林、丙咪嗪和喹硫平,对改善与战斗相关的PTSD症状有积极作用。尽管活性药物的AE没有显著增加,但包括利培酮、丙咪嗪和托吡酯在内的这些药物的停药率增加这一事实值得关注。此外,由于活性药物在不同种族群体和战场中均有效,活性药物治疗方案被证明更适合治疗极端严重PTSD(≥80)症状或至少8周病程的PTSD患者。此外,目前的证据来自60岁以下的成年人以及与战斗相关的男性PTSD患者。该证据能否扩展到其他与战斗相关的PTSD人群,需要后续高质量、大样本研究来证实。