Efficacy, acceptability, and tolerability of antidepressants for sleep quality disturbances in post-traumatic stress disorder: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Sleep quality disturbances are a common occurrence in post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and may remain after evidence-based treatment for PTSD has been implemented. If left untreated, sleep disturbance can perpetuate or aggravate the disorder. A systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted comparing efficacy, acceptability, and tolerability among antidepressants for sleep quality improvement in PTSD, using Cochane's RoB2.0 and GRADE approach for NMA. The Cochrane Library, LILACS, PsycINFO, PTSDpubs, and PubMed Central databases were searched from inception to November 29, 2020, leading to the retrieval of 3733 reports. After the selection process, seven RCTs were included in the review (N = 600). We found low certainty of evidence (LCE) that sertraline may improve sleep quality (measured by PSQI) in adult patients with PTSD (MD -0.48, 95% CrI -0.63 to -0.32). Sertraline was as well accepted (RR 1.12, 95% CrI -0.83 to 1.52, very low certainty [VLCE]) and as well tolerated as placebo (RR 0.58, 95% CrI 0.28 to 1.14, LCE). Mirtazapine (MD -3.35, 95% CrI -9.06 to 2.39, LCE), paroxetine (MD -3.13, 95% CrI -7.47 to 1.26, VLCE), nefazodone (MD -0.25, 95% CrI -5.95 to 5.38, VLCE), and bupropion (MD -2.28, 95% CrI -4.75 to 0.21, VLCE) were similar to placebo for improving sleep quality. These antidepressants resulted in little or no benefit for sleep in PTSD. Although the NMA suggested that sertraline may improve sleep in PTSD compared to placebo, due to the low certainty, these estimates are not robust enough to guide clinical decisions.

Pharmacological treatments for adults with post-traumatic stress disorder: A network meta-analysis of comparative efficacy and acceptability.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare efficacy and acceptability among drug treatments for adults with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) through a systematic review, random-effects pairwise and network meta-analyses. METHODS: Double-blind randomized controlled trials comparing pharmacological interventions for adults with PTSD were searched from database inception through Aug. 28, 2018, on Cochrane (Central), Embase, LILACS, PILOTS, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science. Clinical trial registries and the websites of pharmaceutical companies were also searched. The GRADE system was used to assess the quality of the evidence. RESULTS: The systematic review included 58 studies comprising 6766 patients randomized to 26 different interventions. Regarding efficacy, topiramate (SMD = -0.57; 95%CrI: -1.07,-0.10), risperidone (SMD = -0.53; 95%CrI: -0.93,-0.15), quetiapine (SMD = -0.59; 95%CrI: -1.06,-0.11), paroxetine (SMD = -0.35; 95%CrI: -0.48,-0.21), venlafaxine (SMD = -0.25; 95%CrI: -0.44,-0.05), fluoxetine (SMD = -0.28; 95%CrI: -0.46,-0.08), and sertraline (SMD = -0.21; 95%CrI: -0.33,-0.09) outperformed placebo. Moreover, phenelzine (RR = 3.39; 95%CrI: 1.43,11.09), lamotrigine (RR = 4.39; 95%CrI: 1.18,26.38), and fluoxetine (RR = 1.28%CrI: 1.01,1.59) outperformed placebo in terms of acceptability. CONCLUSIONS: The NMA supports topiramate, risperidone, quetiapine, paroxetine, venlafaxine, fluoxetine and sertraline as effective pharmacological choices for the treatment of PTSD. Quetiapine and topiramate have the shortcoming of relying on a few small studies, but the clinically meaningful change in symptoms is noteworthy and merits further investigation. Among the pharmacological treatments with evidence of efficacy compared to placebo, fluoxetine achieved a relatively high rank regarding acceptability. To the best of our knowledge, this is the largest contemporary NMA on the subject and the addition of new medications is an important extension of previous meta-analyses, enabling a larger number of drug comparisons.

Association between the ankle-brachial index, intermittent claudication, and physical activity level: what is the influence on the functional capacity of patients with or at high risk of cardiovascular disease?

BACKGROUND: Patients with or at high risk of cardiovascular disease have a poor functional capacity; however, the influence of association among intermittent claudication (IC), abnormal ankle-brachial index (ABI), and physical activity level on functional capacity of these patients has not been fully studied. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to investigate the association between the ABI, IC, and physical activity level, and the influence of these variables on the functional capacity of patients with or at high risk of cardiovascular disease seen in a reference cardiology outpatient clinic in Southern Brazil. The secondary objective was to assess the prevalence of peripheral arterial disease (PAD) in this sample of patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a prospective cross-sectional study in which 162 consecutive patients were evaluated and classified into three groups according to their ABI: normal ABI (n=104, values between 1.00 and 1.40); borderline PAD (n=23, values between 0.91 and 1.00); and patients with PAD (n=35, ≤0.90). The presence of IC was assessed using the Edinburgh Claudication Questionnaire. The level of physical activity was assessed by the short version of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) and functional capacity was assessed by the 6-minute walk distance (6MWD). RESULTS: The prevalence of PAD was 21.6% in the total sample. The 6MWD showed strong correlation with the absence of IC (r=0.785; P<0.001), moderate correlation with age (r=-0.347; P<0.001), and weak correlations with IPAQ scores (r=0.164; P=0.038) and ABI (r=0.216; P=0.006). Age, ABI, and absence of IC were independently associated with the outcome (P=0.001, P=0.001, and P=0.028, respectively). CONCLUSION: The current study demonstrates that 6MWD is associated with IPAQ scores, ABI, and absence of IC. Age, ABI and absence of IC were independently associated with functional capacity in patients with or at high risk of cardiovascular disease.