Paroxetine versus amitriptyline in patients with recurrent major depression: A double-blind trial

INTRODUCTION: Long-term exposure to antidepressants is required to prevent relapses and recurrences in patients with recurrent major depression. Furthermore, a good pharmacological compliance is the key to successful long-term treatment. Since the early phases of a treatment influence long-term compliance and compliance is adversely affected by poorly tolerated treatments, efficacy and tolerability of paroxetine and amitryptiline over 12 weeks were compared as an introduction to the issue of long-term compliance to these two agents. METHOD: A 12-week, randomized, double-blind, doubledummy, parallel-group trial which involved 129 patients with recurrent major depression. RESULTS: Both paroxetine and amitriptyline were effective in controlling the symptoms of depression, as shown by the reduction in HAMD total score and CGI severity-of-illness score at endpoint compared to baseline. There was no statistically or clinically significant difference between the two treatments in terms of efficacy. However, marked numerical differences were noted in tolerability: the percentage of patients who reported treatment-emergent adverse experiences was greater in the amitriptyline group (40.0% vs 28.1%). This difference was mainly due to anticholinergic adverse events, which were six times more frequent with amitriptyline than with paroxetine. CONCLUSION: When compared with amitriptyline, paroxetine should allow patients with recurrent major depression to receive an equally effective treatment with a relatively lower incidence of adverse experiences.     

艾司西酞普兰与帕罗西汀治疗惊恐障碍的比较

目的探讨艾司西酞普兰对京恐障碍患者的疗效及不良反应。方法将66例惊恐障碍患者随机分为艾司西酞普兰组和帕罗西汀组,疗程8周,并用汉密顿焦虑量表（HAMA）、汉密顿抑郁量表（HAMD）、抗抑郁药不良反应评定量表（sERS）对患者治疗前后进行评估。结果在治疗的第1周、第2周末艾司西酞普兰组的HAMA分值均低于对照组,而在4、6、8周末,两组患者的HAMA分值差异无统计学意义。在治疗8周末时,艾司西酞普兰组治愈率为64．5％,有效率为90．3％,帕罗西汀组分别为63．3％、90．0％。两组差异无统计学意义。在不良反应方面,两组差异无统计学意义。结论艾司西酞普兰治疗惊恐障碍疗效与帕罗西汀相当,不良反应无明显差异。     

Effect of nortriptyline and paroxetine on measures of chaos of heart rate time series in patients with panic disorder

Tricyclic antidepressants have notable cardiac side effects, and this issue has become important due to the recent reports of increased cardiovascular mortality in patients with depression and anxiety. Several previous studies indicate that serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SRIs) do not appear to have such adverse effects. Apart from the effects of these drugs on routine 12-lead ECG, the effects on beat-to-beat heart rate (HR) and QT interval time series provide more information on the side effects related to cardiac autonomic function. In this study, we evaluated the effects of two antidepressants, nortriptyline (n=13), a tricyclic, and paroxetine (n=16), an SRI inhibitor, on HR variability in patients with panic disorder, using a measure of chaos, the largest Lyapunov exponent (LLE) using pre- and posttreatment HR time series. Our results show that nortriptyline is associated with a decrease in LLE of high frequency (HF: 0.15–0.5 Hz) filtered series, which is most likely due to its anticholinergic effect, while paroxetine had no such effect. Paroxetine significantly decreased sympathovagal ratios as measured by a decrease in LLE of LF/HF. These results suggest that paroxetine appears to be safer in regards to cardiovascular effects compared to nortriptyline in this group of patients.     

Modafinil does not affect serotonin efflux from rat frontal cortex synaptosomes: comparison with known serotonergic drugs

Modafinil did not affect spontaneous and K(+)-evoked [3H]5-HT efflux from cortical synaptosomes while it increased K(+)-evoked tritium efflux from cortical slices, an action that became stronger in the presence of paroxetine. In contrast, DL-fenfluramine and fluoxetine were able to enhance spontaneous and/or K(+)-evoked tritium efflux from synaptosomes and slices. These results suggest that modafinil does not affect 5-HT transmission from cortical synaptosomes and that its 5-HT releasing action is different from that of DL-fenfluramine and fluoxetine.     

2型糖尿病患者生物心理因素的研究

目的探讨2型糖尿病患者有关的生物心理因素。方法对90例2型糖尿病患者和30名正常人进行明尼苏达多相人格调查表(MMPI)、多伦多述情障碍量表(TAS)、汉密尔顿抑郁量表(HAMD)、汉密尔顿焦虑量表(HAMA)、社会支持量表(SS)等评定,测定血浆促肾上腺皮质激素(ACTH)、血小板5-羟色胺(5-HT)、血清白介素(IL)6(IL-6)及SIL-2R水平,并检测患者空腹血糖(FBG)、早餐后2h血糖(2PBG)和糖化血红蛋白指数(HbA1c)水平。将患者随机分为常规治疗组(常规组,45例;采用格列吡嗪7.5-15 mg／d)和常规治疗加帕罗西汀治疗组(合用帕罗西汀组,45例;采用格列吡嗪7.5~15 mg／d和帕罗西汀20 mg／d),治疗2个月后(两组分别失访4例和9例)观察患者上述量表评分、实验室指标的变化及其与FBG、2PBG、HbA1c等指标变化的关系。结果(1)治疗前,与正常对照组比较,患者组TAS、HAMD、HAMA总分高,SS总分较低(P<0.05),MMPI提示人格偏移;血浆ACTH、血清IL-6、SIL-2R及FBG浓度高,血小板5-HT浓度低(均P<0.01和<0.05)。(2)治疗后,合用帕罗西汀组的HAMD分、HAMA分、ACTH、IL-6以及糖代谢指标的改善程度均优于常规组。(3)患者组的HAMD减分率与ACTH变化率(r=0.37)及IL-6变化率(r=0.40)均呈正相关,HAMA减分率与ACTH变化率(r=0.41)呈正相关(均P<0.01);FBG下降率与H     

Impaired platelet [<Superscript>3</Superscript>H]paroxetine binding in female patients with borderline personality disorder

Rationale There have been few studies of platelet paroxetine binding in borderline personality disorder (BPD). Objective Our aim was to determine whether female BPD subjects show abnormalities in platelet paroxetine binding. Methods Twenty-one female BPD subjects and 16 age- and gender-matched normal control subjects were assessed using the following: (1) Diagnostic Interview for Borderlines, Revised, (2) Diagnostic Assessment for Personality Pathology: Brief Questionnaire, and (3) Barratt Impulsivity Scale. Platelets were collected and assayed for platelet paroxetine binding. Results B _max was lower in the BPD group (p<0.0001), but differences in K _d only reached a trend level. There were no associations with trait dimensions independent of diagnosis. Conclusions Reduced platelet paroxetine binding in female BPD patients may reflect presynaptic serotonin dysfunction. This work was funded by the Medical Research Council of Canada     

帕罗西汀替换三环类抗抑郁剂治疗抑郁症对照研究

目的：了解帕罗西汀替换三环类抗抑郁剂(TCAs)治疗抑郁症的有效性和安全性。方法：将经TCAs足量治疗6周疗效达好转及以下的、符合反复发作抑郁症诊断标准的患者随机分为帕罗西汀组和三环类组。帕罗西汀组渐停TCAs，渐增帕罗西汀治疗，剂量20～40mg／d；三环类组继续使用TCAs150～250mg／d治疗。用Hamilton抑郁量表(HAMD)、大体评定量表(GAS)、临床疗效总评量表病情严重程度(GGI-SI)，分别于人组时，治疗1周末、2周末、4周末、8周末评定其病情变化；副反应量表(TESS)评定不良反应。结果：与入组时比较，帕罗西汀组治疗2周末各种量表评分差异即有显著性；三环类组治疗4周末HAMD、GAS评分差异有显著性，CGI—SI评分治疗8周末差异有显著性。帕罗西汀组治疗后HAMD、GAS、CGI—SI减分明显多于三环类组，帕罗西汀组不良反应发生率显著少于三环类组。结论：帕罗西汀替换TCAs治疗效差的抑郁症安全有效，可在临床上试用。     

帕罗西汀治疗偏头痛临床疗效观察

目的评价帕罗西汀治疗偏头痛临床疗效。方法随机将入选120例偏头痛患者分为治疗组（帕罗西汀联合尼莫地平）60例与对照组（单用尼莫地平）60例,疗程12周,对比观察效果。结果治疗组总有效率为96.7%,对照组为76.7%,两组差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）,说明治疗组疗效优于对照组。结论帕罗西汀治疗偏头痛疗效确切,尤其对伴焦虑抑郁症状的患者效果满意。     

帕罗西汀治疗脑原发性抑郁症的疗效观察

目的：观察帕罗西汀治疗脑原发性抑郁症的疗效。方法：选取2009年1月～2010年1月的310例原发性抑郁症患者为研究对象,随机分为两组,治疗组155例,对照组155例。对照组给予神经内常规药物治疗,治疗组在对照组治疗的基础上加服帕罗西汀治疗,疗程为3个月,并观察12个月有效率、HRSD评分、MMSE、SSS评分等。结果：经3个月治疗及12个月的随访,两组治疗总有效率及前后的HRSD评分、MMSE、SSS评分改善值及复发率比较差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）;而不良反应基本相当。结论：帕罗西汀治疗原发性抑郁症的临床疗效良好,副作用少,临床预后好,值得临床推广。     

脑梗死二级预防联用阿托伐他汀和强肝胶囊降脂及安全性析因分析

目的评估动脉粥样硬化性脑梗死( ACI)二级预防病人联用不同剂量阿托伐他汀和强肝胶囊的降脂效果及其安全性。方法选择 2017年 8月至 2018年 1月于冀中能源峰峰集团有限公司总医院神经内科住院的急性脑梗死病人 180例,病因分型为 TOAST大动脉粥样硬化型或小动脉闭塞型,合并高脂血症,既往无类似发作。入选病人按随机数字表法分为 10 mg对照组、 20 mg对照组、 40 mg对照组和 10 mg观察组、 20 mg观察组、 40 mg观察组,均给予对应剂量的阿托伐他汀钙片,口服,每晚 1次;观察组额外加用强肝胶囊 2g,口服,每天 2次;疗程均为 3个月。测定治疗前后病人血脂［三酰甘油( TG)、总胆固醇( TC)、低密度脂蛋白胆固醇( LDL?C)］和谷丙转氨酶( ALT)数值。析因分析比较用药种类、阿托伐他汀剂量对上述指标的影响。结果治疗后阿托伐他汀相同剂量组间比较: 20 mg观察组 TC水平显著低于 20 mg对照组［( 4.04±0.77)比( 4.69±0.91)mmol/L,P＜ 0.01］,差异有统计学意义。关于 LDL?C和 ALT水平, 10 mg观察组显著低于 10 mg对照组［(2.98±0.49)比( 3.34±0.42)mmol/L、