酒精戒断综合征各种药物治疗的疗效比较:系统综述和网络荟萃分析。

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Li Qu, Xue-Ping Ma, Alimujiang Simayi, Xiao-Li Wang, Gui-Ping Xu
{"title":"酒精戒断综合征各种药物治疗的疗效比较:系统综述和网络荟萃分析。","authors":"Li Qu, Xue-Ping Ma, Alimujiang Simayi, Xiao-Li Wang, Gui-Ping Xu","doi":"10.1097/YIC.0000000000000526","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study was to compare multiple classes of medications and medication combinations to find alternatives or additives for patients not applicable to benzodiazepines (BZDs). We performed a network meta-analysis to assess the comparative effect of 11 pharmacologic treatments in patients with alcohol withdrawal syndrome. Forty-one studies were included, comprising a total sample size of 4187 participants. The pooled results from the randomized controlled trials showed that there was no significant difference in the Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment-Alcohol, revised (CIWA-Ar) reduction with other medications or medication combinations compared to BZDs. Compared to BZDs, the mean difference in ICU length of stay of anticonvulsants + BZDs was -1.71 days (95% CI = -2.82, -0.59). Efficacy rankings from cohort studies showed that anticonvulsant + BZDs were superior to other treatments in reducing CIWA-Ar scores and reducing the length of stay in the ICU. Synthesis results from randomized controlled trials indicate that there are currently no data suggesting that other medications or medication combinations can fully replace BZDs. However, synthetic results from observational studies have shown that BZDs are effective in the context of adjuvant anticonvulsant therapy, particularly with early use of gabapentin in combination with BZDs in the treatment of alcohol withdrawal syndrome, which represents a promising treatment option.</p>","PeriodicalId":13698,"journal":{"name":"International Clinical Psychopharmacology","volume":" ","pages":"148-162"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative efficacy of various pharmacologic treatments for alcohol withdrawal syndrome: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Li Qu, Xue-Ping Ma, Alimujiang Simayi, Xiao-Li Wang, Gui-Ping Xu\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/YIC.0000000000000526\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study was to compare multiple classes of medications and medication combinations to find alternatives or additives for patients not applicable to benzodiazepines (BZDs). We performed a network meta-analysis to assess the comparative effect of 11 pharmacologic treatments in patients with alcohol withdrawal syndrome. Forty-one studies were included, comprising a total sample size of 4187 participants. The pooled results from the randomized controlled trials showed that there was no significant difference in the Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment-Alcohol, revised (CIWA-Ar) reduction with other medications or medication combinations compared to BZDs. Compared to BZDs, the mean difference in ICU length of stay of anticonvulsants + BZDs was -1.71 days (95% CI = -2.82, -0.59). Efficacy rankings from cohort studies showed that anticonvulsant + BZDs were superior to other treatments in reducing CIWA-Ar scores and reducing the length of stay in the ICU. Synthesis results from randomized controlled trials indicate that there are currently no data suggesting that other medications or medication combinations can fully replace BZDs. However, synthetic results from observational studies have shown that BZDs are effective in the context of adjuvant anticonvulsant therapy, particularly with early use of gabapentin in combination with BZDs in the treatment of alcohol withdrawal syndrome, which represents a promising treatment option.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13698,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Clinical Psychopharmacology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"148-162\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Clinical Psychopharmacology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/YIC.0000000000000526\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/12/27 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Clinical Psychopharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/YIC.0000000000000526","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究旨在比较多类药物和药物组合,为不适用苯二氮卓类药物(BZDs)的患者寻找替代药物或添加剂。我们进行了一项网络荟萃分析,以评估 11 种药物疗法对酒精戒断综合征患者的比较效果。共纳入 41 项研究,总样本量为 4187 人。随机对照试验的汇总结果显示,与 BZDs 相比,其他药物或药物组合在临床研究所酒精戒断评估修订版(CIWA-Ar)的减量方面没有显著差异。与 BZDs 相比,抗惊厥药 + BZDs 在 ICU 住院时间上的平均差异为-1.71 天(95% CI = -2.82,-0.59)。队列研究的疗效排名显示,在降低CIWA-Ar评分和缩短ICU住院时间方面,抗惊厥药+BZD优于其他治疗方法。随机对照试验的综合结果表明,目前没有数据表明其他药物或药物组合可以完全替代 BZDs。不过,观察性研究的合成结果表明,BZDs 在辅助抗惊厥治疗中是有效的,尤其是早期使用加巴喷丁联合 BZDs 治疗酒精戒断综合征,是一种很有前景的治疗方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative efficacy of various pharmacologic treatments for alcohol withdrawal syndrome: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

This study was to compare multiple classes of medications and medication combinations to find alternatives or additives for patients not applicable to benzodiazepines (BZDs). We performed a network meta-analysis to assess the comparative effect of 11 pharmacologic treatments in patients with alcohol withdrawal syndrome. Forty-one studies were included, comprising a total sample size of 4187 participants. The pooled results from the randomized controlled trials showed that there was no significant difference in the Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment-Alcohol, revised (CIWA-Ar) reduction with other medications or medication combinations compared to BZDs. Compared to BZDs, the mean difference in ICU length of stay of anticonvulsants + BZDs was -1.71 days (95% CI = -2.82, -0.59). Efficacy rankings from cohort studies showed that anticonvulsant + BZDs were superior to other treatments in reducing CIWA-Ar scores and reducing the length of stay in the ICU. Synthesis results from randomized controlled trials indicate that there are currently no data suggesting that other medications or medication combinations can fully replace BZDs. However, synthetic results from observational studies have shown that BZDs are effective in the context of adjuvant anticonvulsant therapy, particularly with early use of gabapentin in combination with BZDs in the treatment of alcohol withdrawal syndrome, which represents a promising treatment option.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
23.10%
发文量
97
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: International Clinical Psychopharmacology provides an essential link between research and clinical practice throughout psychopharmacology. It reports on studies in human subjects, both healthy volunteers and patients, which relate the effects of drugs on psychological processes. A major objective of the journal is to publish fully refereed papers which throw light on the ways in which the study of psychotropic drugs can increase our understanding of psychopharmacology. To this end the journal publishes results of early Phase I and II studies, as well as those of controlled clinical trials of psychotropic drugs in Phase II and IV. Other topics covered include the epidemiology of psychotropic drug prescribing and drug taking, the sociology of psychotropic drugs including compliance, and research into the safety and adverse effects of these compounds.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信