4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Lithium for acute mania

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Bipolar disorder is a common condition associated with high morbidity; developing efficacious, safe treatments is therefore essential. Lithium is an effective maintenance treatment for bipolar disorder. It acts as mood stabiliser and reduces the risk of suicide. However, evidence assessing the efficacy of lithium in the treatment of acute mania is less robust. Current evidence‐based guidelines cite multiple anti‐dopaminergic and mood‐stabilising agents as initial treatments: more definite evidence is needed to decide if lithium should be the first‐line therapy. 1. To assess the effects of lithium in comparison with placebo or other active treatment in alleviating the acute symptoms of a manic or mixed episode in people with bipolar disorder. 2. To review the acceptability and tolerability of treatment with lithium in comparison with placebo or other active treatments in alleviating the acute symptoms of a manic or mixed episode in people with bipolar disorder. We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO. We also searched the World Health Organization trials portal (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov. We checked the reference lists of all included studies and relevant systematic reviews. We have incorporated studies from searches to 18 May 2018 into the current analyses. Prospective randomised controlled studies comparing lithium with placebo or alternative drug treatment in treatment of acute mania. We included anyone with bipolar disorder, male and female, of any age. At least two review authors independently extracted data and assessed methodological quality. We used odds ratios (ORs) to analyse binary efficacy outcomes, and mean differences (MDs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs) for continuously distributed outcomes. We used a fixed‐effect model unless heterogeneity was moderate or substantial, in which case we used a random‐effects model. We used Review Manager 5 to analyse data. We assessed the certainty of evidence for individual outcomes using the GRADE approach. We found 36 randomised controlled studies comparing lithium with placebo, one of 12 drugs, or electroconvulsive therapy for treatment of acute mania. Studies included male and female participants (n = 4220), of all ages, who all fitted criteria for a manic episode within the context of a diagnosis of bipolar disorder. Risk of bias was variable; 12 studies had a high risk of bias in one domain and 27 gave inadequate information on randomisation leading to an 'unclear' rating for selection bias. Lithium versus placebo High‐certainty evidence found that lithium was an effective treatment for acute mania and was more effective than placebo at inducing a response (OR 2.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.73 to 2.63; participants = 1707; studies = 6; I 2 = 16%; high‐certainty evidence), or remission (OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.73 to 2.69; participants = 1597; studies = 5; I 2 = 21%; high‐certainty evidence). Lithium was more likely than placebo to cause tremor (OR 3.25, 95% CI 2.10 to 5.04; participants = 1241; studies = 6; I 2 = 0%; high‐certainty evidence), and somnolence (OR 2.28, 95% CI 1.46 to 3.58; participants = 1351; studies = 7; I 2 = 0%; high‐certainty evidence). There was insufficient evidence to determine the effect of lithium for all‐cause dropouts (OR 0.76; 95% CI 0.46 to 1.25; participants = 1353; studies = 7; I 2 = 75%; moderate‐certainty evidence), and weight gain (OR 1.48, 95% CI 0.56 to 3.92; participants = 735, studies = 3; I 2 = 51%; moderate‐certainty evidence). Lithium versus antipsychotics or mood stabilisers For the outcome of inducing a response, there was only very low‐certainty evidence regarding lithium compared to haloperidol (MD −2.40, 95% CI −6.31 to 1.50; participants = 80; studies = 3; I 2 = 95%), quetiapine (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.55; participants = 335; studies = 2; I 2 = 71%), and carbamazepine (SMD 0.21, 95% CI −0.18 to 0.60; participants = 102; studies = 3; I 2 = 0%). Lithium was probably less likely to induce a response than olanzapine (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.94; participants = 180; studies = 2; I 2 = 0%; moderate‐certainty evidence). Lithium may be less likely to induce a response than risperidone (MD 7.28, 95% CI 5.22 to 9.34; participants = 241; studies = 3; I 2 = 49%; low‐certainty evidence). There was no evidence of a difference between lithium and valproate (OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.70; participants = 607; studies = 5; I 2 = 22%; moderate‐certainty evidence). There was moderate‐certainty evidence that lithium was more effective than topiramate at treating acute mania (OR 2.28, 95% CI 1.63 to 3.20; participants = 660; studies = 1). Data on adverse events for these comparisons contained too few studies to provide high‐certainty evidence. This systematic review indicates that lithium is more effective than placebo as a treatment for acute mania but increases the risk for somnolence and tremor. Limited evidence suggests little or no difference between lithium and other mood stabilisers (valproate, carbamazepine) or antipsychotics (risperidone, quetiapine, haloperidol). Olanzapine may be an exception, as it is probably slightly more effective than lithium. There is uncertain evidence that risperidone may also be more effective than lithium. Lithium is probably more effective at treating acute mania than topiramate. When compared to placebo, lithium was more likely to cause adverse events. However, when compared to other drugs, too few studies provided data on adverse effects to provide high‐certainty evidence. More, rigorously designed, large‐scale studies are needed to definitively conclude if lithium is superior to other interventions in treating acute mania. Review question Is lithium (a mood‐stabilising medication) as effective at treating an episode of mania (high mood) as other available drug treatments or electroconvulsive therapy (ECT)? Background Bipolar disorder is a common condition in which people experience episodes of low mood (depression) and high mood (mania). The symptoms of bipolar disorder may lower quality of life. Traditionally a range of medications have been used to treat mania, including medications that try to lessen changes in mood (e.g. lithium, valproate, lamotrigine, carbamazepine, divalproex, topiramate), and those that reduce distressing experiences, such as hearing voices or having unusual ideas (e.g. olanzapine, risperidone, quetiapine, aripiprazole, haloperidol, chlorpromazine). ECT (delivering an electric shock to the brain whilst the patient is under a general anaesthetic) is also a treatment for mania. We already know that lithium is the most effective of all these treatments for keeping people with bipolar disorder well in the long term, but we do not know if it is as effective for treating mania. Method The review authors searched for studies comparing lithium to other treatments for mania published up to May 2018. We identified 36 randomised studies, including 4220 participants who attended hospitals in at least 30 different countries. Randomisation means that each participant has the same chance of being assigned to each of the study groups, and reduces the chance that unknown but important factors could influence the study accidentally. Three studies included children and adolescents aged under 18 years. The studies compared lithium to placebo (inactive substance), ECT and 12 other medications for between three and 12 weeks. Results Lithium is an effective treatment for acute mania. Lithium was more effective than a placebo or the anti‐epileptic drug topiramate. There was some evidence that lithium may be less effective than the antipsychotic drug olanzapine, but this needs further investigation. There was no evidence that lithium was better or worse at treating mania than any of the other drugs, and not enough evidence to draw a conclusion for ECT. There was not enough evidence to provide a definite answer as to which treatment for mania has the fewest side effects. It is probable that more people will develop a mild tremor when treated with lithium than other treatments. Participants were not more likely to withdraw from a study if they were treated with lithium compared to another treatment. Unanswered questions remain, and these would be best resolved by further large, well‐designed studies comparing lithium to other treatments for acute mania.

          Related collections

          Most cited references82

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Bipolar disorder diagnosis: challenges and future directions.

          Bipolar disorder refers to a group of affective disorders, which together are characterised by depressive and manic or hypomanic episodes. These disorders include: bipolar disorder type I (depressive and manic episodes: this disorder can be diagnosed on the basis of one manic episode); bipolar disorder type II (depressive and hypomanic episodes); cyclothymic disorder (hypomanic and depressive symptoms that do not meet criteria for depressive episodes); and bipolar disorder not otherwise specified (depressive and hypomanic-like symptoms that do not meet the diagnostic criteria for any of the aforementioned disorders). Bipolar disorder type II is especially difficult to diagnose accurately because of the difficulty in differentiation of this disorder from recurrent unipolar depression (recurrent depressive episodes) in depressed patients. The identification of objective biomarkers that represent pathophysiologic processes that differ between bipolar disorder and unipolar depression can both inform bipolar disorder diagnosis and provide biological targets for the development of new and personalised treatments. Neuroimaging studies could help the identification of biomarkers that differentiate bipolar disorder from unipolar depression, but the problem in detection of a clear boundary between these disorders suggests that they might be better represented as a continuum of affective disorders. Innovative combinations of neuroimaging and pattern recognition approaches can identify individual patterns of neural structure and function that accurately ascertain where a patient might lie on a behavioural scale. Ultimately, an integrative approach, with several biological measurements using different scales, could yield patterns of biomarkers (biosignatures) to help identify biological targets for personalised and new treatments for all affective disorders. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Major Depressive Disorder and Bipolar Disorder Predispose Youth to Accelerated Atherosclerosis and Early Cardiovascular Disease: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

            In the 2011 "Expert Panel on Integrated Guidelines for Cardiovascular Health and Risk Reduction in Children and Adolescents," several medical conditions among youth were identified that predispose to accelerated atherosclerosis and early cardiovascular disease (CVD), and risk stratification and management strategies for youth with these conditions were elaborated. Major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar disorder (BD) among youth satisfy the criteria set for, and therefore merit inclusion among, Expert Panel tier II moderate-risk conditions. The combined prevalence of MDD and BD among adolescents in the United States is ≈10%, at least 10 times greater than the prevalence of the existing moderate-risk conditions combined. The high prevalence of MDD and BD underscores the importance of positioning these diseases alongside other pediatric diseases previously identified as moderate risk for CVD. The overall objective of this statement is to increase awareness and recognition of MDD and BD among youth as moderate-risk conditions for early CVD. To achieve this objective, the primary specific aims of this statement are to (1) summarize evidence that MDD and BD are tier II moderate-risk conditions associated with accelerated atherosclerosis and early CVD and (2) position MDD and BD as tier II moderate-risk conditions that require the application of risk stratification and management strategies in accordance with Expert Panel recommendations. In this scientific statement, there is an integration of the various factors that putatively underlie the association of MDD and BD with CVD, including pathophysiological mechanisms, traditional CVD risk factors, behavioral and environmental factors, and psychiatric medications.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Lithium plus valproate combination therapy versus monotherapy for relapse prevention in bipolar I disorder (BALANCE): a randomised open-label trial.

              Lithium carbonate and valproate semisodium are both recommended as monotherapy for prevention of relapse in bipolar disorder, but are not individually fully effective in many patients. If combination therapy with both agents is better than monotherapy, many relapses and consequent disability could be avoided. We aimed to establish whether lithium plus valproate was better than monotherapy with either drug alone for relapse prevention in bipolar I disorder. 330 patients aged 16 years and older with bipolar I disorder from 41 sites in the UK, France, USA, and Italy were randomly allocated to open-label lithium monotherapy (plasma concentration 0.4-1.0 mmol/L, n=110), valproate monotherapy (750-1250 mg, n=110), or both agents in combination (n=110), after an active run-in of 4-8 weeks on the combination. Randomisation was by computer program, and investigators and participants were informed of treatment allocation. All outcome events were considered by the trial management team, who were masked to treatment assignment. Participants were followed up for up to 24 months. The primary outcome was initiation of new intervention for an emergent mood episode, which was compared between groups by Cox regression. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered, number ISRCTN 55261332. 59 (54%) of 110 people in the combination therapy group, 65 (59%) of 110 in the lithium group, and 76 (69%) of 110 in the valproate group had a primary outcome event during follow-up. Hazard ratios for the primary outcome were 0.59 (95% CI 0.42-0.83, p=0.0023) for combination therapy versus valproate, 0.82 (0.58-1.17, p=0.27) for combination therapy versus lithium, and 0.71 (0.51-1.00, p=0.0472) for lithium versus valproate. 16 participants had serious adverse events after randomisation: seven receiving valproate monotherapy (three deaths); five lithium monotherapy (two deaths); and four combination therapy (one death). For people with bipolar I disorder, for whom long-term therapy is clinically indicated, both combination therapy with lithium plus valproate and lithium monotherapy are more likely to prevent relapse than is valproate monotherapy. This benefit seems to be irrespective of baseline severity of illness and is maintained for up to 2 years. BALANCE could neither reliably confirm nor refute a benefit of combination therapy compared with lithium monotherapy. Stanley Medical Research Institute; Sanofi-Aventis. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
                Wiley
                14651858
                June 01 2019
                Affiliations
                [1 ]University of Oxford; Department of Psychiatry; Warneford Hospital Warneford Lane Oxford UK OX3 7JX
                [2 ]Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust; John Radcliffe Hospital; Oxford UK
                [3 ]Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London; Department of Psychosis Studies; De Crespigny Park London UK SE5 8AF
                [4 ]Tel Aviv University; Department of Psychiatry, Sackler Faculty of Medicine; Tel Aviv Israel
                [5 ]Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust; Warneford Hospital; Oxford UK
                Article
                10.1002/14651858.CD004048.pub4
                6544558
                31152444
                1d78bcfd-dbca-459c-a95e-38dcd0baf589
                © 2019
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article