Dataset Information

Effects of antipsychotics on heart rate in treatment of schizophrenia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Antipsychotics are the treatment of choice in the therapy of schizophrenia. These drugs can be associated with changes in heart rate, but this question has never been examined systematically.

Objective

We aimed to analyse changes in heart rate during treatment with antipsychotics using the frequency of tachycardia and bradycardia events.

Design

For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we included all randomized controlled trials for the acute treatment of schizophrenia comparing antipsychotics head-to-head or with placebo.

Data sources and methods

We searched Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, BIOSIS, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov (last search June 2021). Two authors independently selected studies and extracted data. We conducted pairwise meta-analyses using a random-effects model. Outcomes were tachycardia and bradycardia events.

Results

We found 469 trials meeting the inclusion criteria. Seventy-seven studies with 16,907 participants provided data on tachycardia or bradycardia events. We found no significant differences between antipsychotics and placebo or between antipsychotics for bradycardia events based on sparse data. Antipsychotics had a higher risk for tachycardia events compared with placebo [N = 37, n = 7827, risk ratio (RR) = 1.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.40-2.41], with large differences between the individual substances (iloperidone RR = 14.05, chlorpromazine RR = 4.84, loxapine RR = 4.52, risperidone RR = 3.38, quetiapine RR = 2.64, paliperidone RR = 1.65). Some head-to-head comparisons were also significantly different: olanzapine versus haloperidol RR = 2.87, chlorpromazine versus thiothixene RR = 2.92, quetiapine versus lurasidone RR = 3.22, risperidone versus aripiprazole RR = 4.37, iloperidone versus ziprasidone RR = 4.65).

Conclusion

Many studies do not report data for cardiac outcomes, but the available evidence indicates that treatment with antipsychotics raises the risk for tachycardia. Therefore, especially patients with cardiac risk factors should be monitored closely during antipsychotic treatment.

Registration

PROSPERO: CRD42014014919.

SUBMITTER: Huhn M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9237927 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Few controlled trials compared second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) with first-generation antipsychotics (FGAs) regarding relapse prevention in schizophrenia. We conducted a systematic review/meta-analysis of randomized trials, lasting ?6 months comparing SGAs with FGAs in schizophrenia. Primary outcome was study-defined relapse; secondary outcomes included relapse at 3, 6 and 12 months; treatment failure; hospitalization; and dropout owing to any cause, non-adherence and intolerability. Pooled relative risk (RR) (±95% confidence intervals (CIs)) was calculated using random-effects model, with numbers-needed-to-treat (NNT) calculations where appropriate. Across 23 studies (n=4504, mean duration=61.9±22.4 weeks), none of the individual SGAs outperformed FGAs (mainly haloperidol) regarding study-defined relapse, except for isolated, single trial-based superiority, and except for risperidone's superiority at 3 and 6 months when requiring ?3 trials. Grouped together, however, SGAs prevented relapse more than FGAs (29.0 versus 37.5%, RR=0.80, CI: 0.70-0.91, P=0.0007, I(2)=37%; NNT=17, CI: 10-50, P=0.003). SGAs were also superior regarding relapse at 3, 6 and 12 months (P=0.04, P<0.0001, P=0.0001), treatment failure (P=0.003) and hospitalization (P=0.004). SGAs showed trend-level superiority for dropout owing to intolerability (P=0.05). Superiority of SGAs regarding relapse was modest (NNT=17), but confirmed in double-blind trials, first- and multi-episode patients, using preferentially or exclusively raw or estimated relapse rates, and for different haloperidol equivalent comparator doses. There was no significant heterogeneity or publication bias. The relevance of the somewhat greater efficacy of SGAs over FGAs on several key outcomes depends on whether SGAs form a meaningful group and whether mid- or low-potency FGAs differ from haloperidol. Regardless, treatment selection needs to be individualized considering patient- and medication-related factors.