| Literature DB >> 30123386 |
Yao-Chin Wang1,2,3, Po-An Tai4, Tahmina Nasrin Poly1,3, Md Mohaimenul Islam1,3, Hsuan-Chia Yang1,4, Chieh-Chen Wu1,3, Yu-Chuan Jack Li1,3,5,6.
Abstract
Antidepressants are the most commonly and widely used medication for its effectiveness in the treatment of anxiety and depression. A few epidemiological studies have documented that antidepressant is associated with increased risk of dementia so far. Here, our aim is to assess the association between antidepressant use and risk of dementia in elderly patients. We searched articles through MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google, and Google Scholar from inception to December 1, 2017, that reported on the association between antidepressant use and dementia risk. Data were collected from each study independently, and study duplication was checked by at least three senior researchers based on a standardized protocol. Summary relative risk (RR) with 95% CI was calculated by using a random-effects model. We selected 9 out of 754 unique abstracts for full-text review using our predetermined selection criteria, and 5 out of these 9 studies, comprising 53,955 participants, met all of our inclusion criteria. The overall pooled RR of dementia was 1.75 (95% CI: 1.033-2.964) for SSRIs whereas the overall pooled RR of dementia was 2.131 (95% CI: 1.427-3.184) for tricyclic use. Also, MAOIs showed a high rate of increase with significant heterogeneity. Our findings indicate that antidepressant use is significantly associated with an increased risk of developing dementia. Therefore, we suggest physicians to carefully prescribe antidepressants, especially in elder patients. Additionally, treatment should be stopped if any symptoms related to dementia are to be noticed.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30123386 PMCID: PMC6079596 DOI: 10.1155/2018/5315098
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Behav Neurol ISSN: 0953-4180 Impact factor: 3.342
Figure 1Flow chart of study selection. Diagram of study selection, adapted from the PRISMA group 2009 flow diagram.
Characteristics of five included studies regarding antidepressants use and dementia risk.
| Author/year | Country | Study duration | Study design | Adjustments | Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wei-Sheng Lee-2016 [ | Taiwan | 2005–2011 | Case-control | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 | For SSRIs, |
| Wei-Sheng Lee-2017 [ | Taiwan | 2005–2011 | Case-control | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 | For SSRIs, |
| Wang 2016 [ | USA | 1991–2010 | Cohort | 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 10 , 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 | For SSRIs, |
| Then 2017 [ | Taiwan | 2003–2006 | Cohort | 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, 19, 20 | For SSRIs, |
| Goveas 2012 [ | USA | 1996–2007 | Cohort | 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 9, 10, 11, 21 | For SSRIs, |
(1) age, (2) gender, (3) diabetes, (4) hypertension, (5) stroke, (6) coronary artery disease, (7) head injury, (8) anxiety, (9) depression, (10) smoking, (11) body mass index, (12) cancer, (13) COPD, (14) liver disease, (15) hyperlipidemia, (16) renal disease, (17) thyroid disease, (18) cerebrovascular disease, (19) insomnia, (20) CCI, and (21) history of alcohol consumption.
Figure 2Forest plot of studies examining the association between SSRI use and dementia risk.
Figure 3Forest plot of studies examining the association between TCA use and dementia risk.
Figure 4Forest plot of studies examining the association between MAOI use and dementia risk.
Figure 5Funnel plot showing the association between antidepressant use and dementia risk.
| Case-control study | Selection | Comparability | Exposure | Total | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Definition adequate | Representativeness of the cases | Selection of controls | Definition of controls | Control for important factor or additional factor | Ascertainment of exposure | Same method of ascertainment for cases and controls | Nonresponse rate | (0–9) | |
| Wei-Sheng Lee-2017 [ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗∗ | ∗ | ∗ | 8 | |
| Wei-Sheng Lee-2016 [ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗∗ | ∗ | ∗ | 9 | |
Note: a “star (∗)” system of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) has been developed for the methodological quality assessment: each study can be awarded a maximum of one star for each numbered item within the selection and exposure categories, while a maximum of two stars can be given for the comparability category.
| Cohort study | Selection | Comparability | Exposure | Total | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selection of nonexposed cohort | Representativeness of the cohort | Ascertainment of exposure | Outcome of interest | Comparability of cohorts on the basis of the design or analysis | Assessment of outcome | Follow-up long enough for outcomes to occur | Adequacy of follow-up of cohorts | (0–9) | |
| Wang 2016 [ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | 7 | |
| Then 2017 [ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | 9 |
| Goveas 2012 [ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | ∗ | 6 | ||
Note: a “star (∗)” system of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) has been developed for the methodological quality assessment: each study can be awarded a maximum of one star for each numbered item within the selection and exposure categories, while a maximum of two stars can be given for the comparability category.