2018
DOI: 10.1111/bdi.12623
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effectiveness of maintenance therapy of lithium vs other mood stabilizers in monotherapy and in combinations: a systematic review of evidence from observational studies

Abstract: The results show the superiority in real life of lithium monotherapy compared with monotherapy with other maintenance mood stabilizers. The four largest register-based studies largely addressed confounding, but, as ever, residual confounding cannot be excluded. Nevertheless, the observational findings substantially add to the findings from randomized controlled trials, whose designs often limit the validity of comparison between medicines.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

7
75
1
6

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 99 publications
(98 citation statements)
references
References 57 publications
7
75
1
6
Order By: Relevance
“…There is ongoing debate as to the definition of the term mood stabiliser2,3 and, for the purposes of this review, we will use it to refer to the anticonvulsants and lithium. Lithium is widely regarded as the gold standard medication for mood stabilisation 4-6. However, perceived difficulties with prescribing lithium—its potential long‐term side effects on renal and thyroid function and the fact that monitoring blood levels is essential—have limited its use and, although it provides robust prophylaxis for approximately a third of patients with bipolar disorder,7 the remainder require alternative strategies, including anticonvulsants and antipsychotics.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is ongoing debate as to the definition of the term mood stabiliser2,3 and, for the purposes of this review, we will use it to refer to the anticonvulsants and lithium. Lithium is widely regarded as the gold standard medication for mood stabilisation 4-6. However, perceived difficulties with prescribing lithium—its potential long‐term side effects on renal and thyroid function and the fact that monitoring blood levels is essential—have limited its use and, although it provides robust prophylaxis for approximately a third of patients with bipolar disorder,7 the remainder require alternative strategies, including anticonvulsants and antipsychotics.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…So clinicians, according to some international guidelines for the treatment of BD (Fountoulakis et al, ; Grunze et al, ), often utilize polypharmacy to improve the outcome (Lin, Mok, & Yatham, ). Nevertheless, evidence‐supported criteria for selecting Li monotherapy, anticonvulsant monotherapy, or polypharmacy are scant, and no compelling data suggesting that polypharmacy works better than Li monotherapy are available (BALANCE investigators and collaborators, Geddes et al, ; Goodwin et al, ; Grunze et al, ; Kemp et al, ; Kessing et al, ). Therefore, real‐world studies investigating the prescription patterns in psychiatric centers specialized in mood disorders might contribute to identify the best long‐term treatment for BD.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Lithium (Li) has been the standard prophylactic treatment of BD since 1960s, and it is still the first-line therapy for long-term management of bipolar patients, as highlighted by several observational and randomized clinical trials (Bowden et al, 2010;Hayes et al, 2016;Kessing et al, 2018;Kessing, Hellmund, Geddes, Goodwin, & Andersen, 2011;Lähteenvuo et al, 2018;Malhi et al, 2012;Malhi & Outhred, 2016;Muzina & Calabrese, 2005;Nolen, 2015;Yildiz, Vieta, Tohen, & Baldessarini, 2011). Clinical predictors of good response to Li prophylaxis are BD-I diagnosis, manic index polarity, pure mania, full interepisodic remission, few previous psychiatric hospitalizations, low somatic comorbidity, and positive response to lithium in first-degree relatives (Gershon, Chengappa, & Malhi, 2009;Grof, 2010;Grof et al, 2002;Kleindienst, Engel, & Greil, 2005;Licht, 2012).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations