BACKGROUND: Autism is a multifactorial disease with multiple etiologic hypotheses. Some studies suggest changes in brain GABA mediated inhibition in autism, and a higher intracellular chlorine levels in autistic children. Given these data, clinical trials are conducted to test the efficacy of diuretics in improving clinical symptoms in autism. AIM: The aim of our study was to evaluate the effectiveness of Bumetanide in autistic children. METHODS: This is an experimental study of cross-type. We included children older than 5 years, with autistic disorder according to the diagnostic criteria of DSM- IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, IV) and ADI-R (Autism Diagnostic Interview Revised), followed by the child psychiatry consultation Razi hospital. The subjects underwent assessment using the ADI-R, the behavioral scale CARS (Childhood autistic rating scale) and CGI (Clinical Global printing) prior to take diuretic (Bumetanide). In the protocol, the children received checks to day7, day14, day30, day60, day90 comprising: a clinical evaluation (weight gain, blood pressure, general examination for potential adverse effects); biological evaluation; and evaluations by scales (CARS and CGI) after every 3 months of evolution to objectively assess effectiveness. RESULTS: Twenty-nine children were included in our study. The average age was 7.9 years.Initiation of medication was carried out with a dose of 1 mg / day, in all children. The average duration of the protocol was 12 months. Sixteen children were excluded from the study for the following reasons: appearance of hypokalemia, poor tolerance of treatment, insufficient efficacy as estimated by parents. Measuring the effectiveness of diuretic, by studying correlations in the CARS showed an efficacy of this treatment at 3 months (p˂10-3), 6 months (p˂10-3), at 9 months (p = 0.010) and 12 months (p = 0.04), and this compared to the initial assessment. Significant improvement (p˂10-3) was found between the 3rd and 6th month. CONCLUSION: While our results seem to be promising. A larger sample and a medium and long-term evaluation after the end of treatment are needed.
BACKGROUND:Autism is a multifactorial disease with multiple etiologic hypotheses. Some studies suggest changes in brain GABA mediated inhibition in autism, and a higher intracellular chlorine levels in autisticchildren. Given these data, clinical trials are conducted to test the efficacy of diuretics in improving clinical symptoms in autism. AIM: The aim of our study was to evaluate the effectiveness of Bumetanide in autisticchildren. METHODS: This is an experimental study of cross-type. We included children older than 5 years, with autistic disorder according to the diagnostic criteria of DSM- IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, IV) and ADI-R (Autism Diagnostic Interview Revised), followed by the child psychiatry consultation Razi hospital. The subjects underwent assessment using the ADI-R, the behavioral scale CARS (Childhood autistic rating scale) and CGI (Clinical Global printing) prior to take diuretic (Bumetanide). In the protocol, the children received checks to day7, day14, day30, day60, day90 comprising: a clinical evaluation (weight gain, blood pressure, general examination for potential adverse effects); biological evaluation; and evaluations by scales (CARS and CGI) after every 3 months of evolution to objectively assess effectiveness. RESULTS: Twenty-nine children were included in our study. The average age was 7.9 years.Initiation of medication was carried out with a dose of 1 mg / day, in all children. The average duration of the protocol was 12 months. Sixteen children were excluded from the study for the following reasons: appearance of hypokalemia, poor tolerance of treatment, insufficient efficacy as estimated by parents. Measuring the effectiveness of diuretic, by studying correlations in the CARS showed an efficacy of this treatment at 3 months (p˂10-3), 6 months (p˂10-3), at 9 months (p = 0.010) and 12 months (p = 0.04), and this compared to the initial assessment. Significant improvement (p˂10-3) was found between the 3rd and 6th month. CONCLUSION: While our results seem to be promising. A larger sample and a medium and long-term evaluation after the end of treatment are needed.