Background: Although the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are widely used as first-line agents in depression, amitriptyline, a reference tricyclic (TCA) agent, has the edge in terms of efficacy over control antidepressants (ADs), but it is not clear whether this advantage can be attributed to a more favourable profile in inpatients, but not in outpatients, with depression. The aim of this study was to investigate the contribution of study setting on outcome in clinical trials comparing amitriptyline with any other AD. Methods: A systematic review and meta-regression analysis of amitryptiline randomised clinical trials was carried out. The electronic search yielded 181 randomised clinical trials, 47% enrolling inpatients and 53% outpatients with depression. Results: Both on a dichotomous and continuous outcome, amitriptyline was more effective than control agents in inpatients [Peto odds ratio (OR): 1.22, 95%, Confidence Interval (CI): 1.04, 1.42; Standardised Mean Difference (SMD): 0.28, 95%, CI: 0.08, 0.46], but not in outpatients (Peto OR: 1.01, 95%, CI: 0.88, 1.17; SMD: 0.10, 95% CI: -0.02, 0.23). Among inpatients amitriptyline was significantly more effective than TCA and nonsignificantly more effective than the SSRIs. Among outpatients no statistically significant differences emerged between amitriptyline and TCA and between amitriptyline and the SSRIs. Amitriptyline was less well tolerated than control agents in outpatients (Peto OR: 0.90, 95%, CI: 0.81, 0.99), but not in inpatients (Peto OR: 1.09, 95% CI: 0.95, 1.25). Conclusions: These data suggest that a reasonable approach could be the first-line prescription of newer agents in the routine outpatient care of depressive subjects, and the use of amitriptyline in inpatients with severe depression.

Amitriptyline for inpatients and SSRIs for outpatients with depression? Systematic review and meta-regression analysis

Barbui C.;
2004-01-01

Abstract

Background: Although the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are widely used as first-line agents in depression, amitriptyline, a reference tricyclic (TCA) agent, has the edge in terms of efficacy over control antidepressants (ADs), but it is not clear whether this advantage can be attributed to a more favourable profile in inpatients, but not in outpatients, with depression. The aim of this study was to investigate the contribution of study setting on outcome in clinical trials comparing amitriptyline with any other AD. Methods: A systematic review and meta-regression analysis of amitryptiline randomised clinical trials was carried out. The electronic search yielded 181 randomised clinical trials, 47% enrolling inpatients and 53% outpatients with depression. Results: Both on a dichotomous and continuous outcome, amitriptyline was more effective than control agents in inpatients [Peto odds ratio (OR): 1.22, 95%, Confidence Interval (CI): 1.04, 1.42; Standardised Mean Difference (SMD): 0.28, 95%, CI: 0.08, 0.46], but not in outpatients (Peto OR: 1.01, 95%, CI: 0.88, 1.17; SMD: 0.10, 95% CI: -0.02, 0.23). Among inpatients amitriptyline was significantly more effective than TCA and nonsignificantly more effective than the SSRIs. Among outpatients no statistically significant differences emerged between amitriptyline and TCA and between amitriptyline and the SSRIs. Amitriptyline was less well tolerated than control agents in outpatients (Peto OR: 0.90, 95%, CI: 0.81, 0.99), but not in inpatients (Peto OR: 1.09, 95% CI: 0.95, 1.25). Conclusions: These data suggest that a reasonable approach could be the first-line prescription of newer agents in the routine outpatient care of depressive subjects, and the use of amitriptyline in inpatients with severe depression.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11562/303899
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 25
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 22
social impact