文拉法辛缓释剂与普通剂型治疗抑郁症患者的疗效比较

A comparison of venlafaxine-extended-release (XR) and venlafaxine-general in the treatment of outpatients with depression.

目的评价和比较文拉法辛缓释剂与普通剂型治疗门诊的抑郁症患者的临床疗效和安全性。方法将82例在门诊就诊的抑郁症患者按性别、年龄匹配的原则分为2组,分别给予文拉法辛缓释剂或普通剂型治疗,在10d内逐步增高剂量至150mg/d,在治疗前后用汉密尔顿抑郁量表(HAMD)、汉密尔顿焦虑量表(HAMA)和副反应量表(TESS)评定疗效和不良反应。结果42例抑郁症患者应用缓释剂,40例应用普通剂型,经6周的治疗后HAMD、HAMA的总分较治疗前均有差异,缓释剂和普通剂型临床治愈率分别是38.00%、35.00%,显效率为66.67%、65.00%,有效率为86.00%、85.00%,无效率为14.00%、15.00%;两组不良反应轻且发生率低。结论文拉法辛缓释剂和普通剂型均是安全、有效、依从性好、不良反应较少的新一代抗抑郁药,可以作为门诊治疗抑郁症的首选用药。

Objective To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of venlafaxine-XR with venlafacine in treatment of outpatients with depression. Methods Eighty two outpatients meeting with criteria of depression of CCMD-Ⅲ received either venlafaxine-XR or venlafaxine-general for 6 weeks, at a dose titrated from 75mg/day to a maximum of 150mg/day within the first 10 days of treatment. Effects and adverse events were evaluated with HAMD, HAMA and TESS before and after the treatment. Results After 6 weeks of treatment, total scores of HAMD, HAMA in 42 patients with venlafaxine-XR and 40 patients with venlafaxine-general were compared. Both showed significant changes of scores compared with those of per-treatment. The cure rate, significant improvement rate, response rate and no response rate were 38% vc 36%, 66% vc 65%, 86% vc 85% and 14% vc 15%, respectively. There was no difference in the rate of adverse events of two groups. Conclusion Venlafaxine-XR and venlafaxine-general both are effective and safe antidepressant agents, which suggests that venlafaxine-XR and venlafaxine-general could be used as the first-line drug of antideprssants in the treatment of depression.