文拉法辛缓释剂(24例)与氯米帕明(25例)治疗广泛性焦虑症的比较

Venlafaxine extended release (24 patients) vs clomipramine (25 patients) in treatment of generalized anxiety disorder

目的 :比较文拉法辛缓释剂与氯米帕明治疗广泛性焦虑症的疗效和安全性。方法 :文拉法辛缓释剂组 (文拉法辛组 ) 2 4例 ,年龄为 (36±s1 2 )a,1 8～ 55a;氯米帕明组 2 5例 ,年龄为 (35± 1 2 )a,2 0～55a。文拉法辛用量 75～ 2 2 5mg·d-1 ,po,qd,氯米帕明用量 50～ 2 50mg·d-1 ,po,bid。共 6wk。疗效评定采用HAMA减分率。安全性评价应用TESS、体检和实验室检查。结果 :经过 6wk的治疗 ,文拉法辛组痊愈率为 2 7% ,有效率为 59%。氯米帕明组痊愈率为 33 % ,有效率为 62 % ,P >0 .0 5。另外 ,文拉法辛组的抗焦虑起效时间与氯米帕明组相近 ,不良反应较氯米帕明组少。结论 :文拉法辛缓释剂治疗广泛性焦虑症疗效与氯米帕明相似 。

AIM: To compare the efficacy and safety of venlafaxine extended release (ER) and clo mipramine in the treatment of generalized anxiety discorder (GAD). METHODS: Venlafaxine ER groups of 24 patients (age (36±s12)a, 18～55 a) was treate d w ith venlafaine ER 75～225 mg·d -1 , po, qd, for 6 wk, clomipranine grou p of 25 patients (age (35±12) a, 20～55 a) was treated with clomipramine 50～ 250 mg·d -1 , po, bid, for 6 wk. HAMA was adopted to evaluate the efficac y. Safety was evaluated by TESS, laboratory and physcial examination. RESULTS: After 6 wk treatment, the effective rate of venlafaxine ER group was 59 %, the cured rate was 27 %. The effective rate of clomipramine group was 62 % , the cured rate was 33 % . There was no significant difference between two gr oups (P>0.05). The adverse reactions of venlafaxine ER groups were less than t hat of clomipramine group. CONCLUSION: Venlafaxine ER is effective in treatment of GAD as well as clomipr amine.