Maj M, Pirozzi R, Magliano L
Department of Psychiatry, First Medical School, University of Naples, Italy.
Am J Psychiatry. 1995 Dec;152(12):1810-1. doi: 10.1176/ajp.152.12.1810.
The authors explored the prevalence and predictors of nonresponse to reinstituted lithium prophylaxis in bipolar patients who had relapsed after discontinuation of successful lithium treatment.
The study was conducted with 54 bipolar patients for whom lithium had been reintroduced after one or more recurrences following discontinuation of successful prophylaxis. They were followed up, through bimonthly personal interviews, for 1 year after recovery from the episode during which lithium treatment had been resumed, or up to the first recurrence with onset after lithium reinstitution.
During the follow-up period, 44 patients did not have any affective episodes, whereas 10 had at least one recurrence. The only significant difference between the two patient groups was the longer duration of prediscontinuation lithium treatment for the patients who relapsed.
Nonresponse to reinstituted prophylaxis should be considered among the possible risks of the interruption of effective long-term lithium treatment.
作者探讨了在成功停用锂盐治疗后复发的双相情感障碍患者中,重新进行锂盐预防治疗无效的患病率及预测因素。
该研究纳入了54例双相情感障碍患者,这些患者在成功停用锂盐预防治疗后复发一次或多次,之后重新接受锂盐治疗。在恢复锂盐治疗的发作缓解后,通过每两个月进行一次个人访谈,对他们进行为期1年的随访,或直至重新开始使用锂盐后首次复发。
在随访期间,44例患者未出现任何情感发作,而10例患者至少复发一次。两组患者之间唯一的显著差异是复发患者在停用锂盐治疗前的治疗时间更长。
在有效长期锂盐治疗中断的可能风险中,应考虑重新进行预防治疗无效这一情况。