Article

Restless legs syndrome

Department of Neurology and Sleep Disorders Centre, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
BMJ (online) (Impact Factor: 16.38). 05/2012; 344:e3056. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.e3056
Source: PubMed
0 Followers
 · 
162 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Schizophrenia is associated with impaired sleep continuity. The second generation antipsychotics clozapine and olanzapine have been reported to improve sleep continuity but also to rarely induce restless legs syndrome (RLS). The aims of this randomized double-blind study were to compare the effects of clozapine and olanzapine on sleep and the occurrence of RLS. Therefore, polysomnographies were recorded and RLS symptoms were assessed in 30 patients with schizophrenia before and after 2, 4 and 6weeks of treatment with either clozapine or olanzapine. Treatment with both antipsychotics increased total sleep time, sleep period time and sleep efficiency and decreased sleep onset latency. These changes were similar in both groups, occurred during the first 2 treatment weeks and were sustained. For example, sleep efficiency increased from 83% (olanzapine) and 82% (clozapine) at baseline to 95% at week 2 and 97% at week 6 in both treatment groups. Sleep architecture was differently affected: clozapine caused a significantly stronger increase of stage 2 sleep (44%) than olanzapine (11%) but olanzapine a significantly stronger increase of REM-sleep. Olanzapine caused an 80% increase of slow wave sleep whereas clozapine caused a 6% decrease. No patient reported any of 4 RLS defining symptoms at baseline. During treatment, 1 patient of each group reported at one visit all 4 symptoms, i.e. met the diagnosis of an RLS. In conclusion, sleep continuity similarly improved and sleep architecture changed more physiologically with olanzapine. Neither of the antipsychotics induced RLS symptoms that were clinically relevant.
    Schizophrenia Research 12/2013; 152(1). DOI:10.1016/j.schres.2013.11.009 · 4.43 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract Objective: A mixed treatment comparison (MTC) was performed to investigate relative safety and efficacy of licensed pharmaceuticals for moderate-to-severe restless legs syndrome (RLS). Methods: RLS trials published over the past 10 years were identified via systematic literature searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and manufacturers' websites. MTC was performed with WinBUGS software using Bayesian approach. Identified primary outcomes: change in International RLS Study Group Rating Scale (IRLS) at week 12 and end of maintenance (EoM). Secondary outcomes: IRLS and Clinical Global Impression- Improvement scale (CGI-I) responders, RLS-6 items and adverse events (AEs). Results: Twenty-eight clinical trials were identified. Fifteen were included in the primary analysis. Indirect comparisons were established among gabapentin enacarbil, pramipexole, ropinirole, rotigotine and placebo. Overall, the four active treatments showed similar efficacies as assessed by changes in IRLS scores, IRLS responders, CGI-I responders, and RLS-6 scores. The sole exception was change in IRLS at week 12, for which rotigotine was likely more efficacious than ropinirole (mean difference:-2.52 [95% CrI:-4.74,-0.40]). Indirect comparisons on safety endpoints indicated ropinirole was associated with a higher risk of nausea than the other agents, and was more likely to result in discontinuations due to lack of efficacy than pramipexole. Nausea was likely more frequent with pramipexole than gabapentin enacarbil, and rotigotine was more likely to result in discontinuation due to AEs than ropinirole and pramipexole. Conclusions: This MTC confirmed superiority of gabapentin enacarbil, pramipexole, ropinirole, and rotigotine above placebo in alleviating RLS symptoms. Compared to ropinirole, rotigotine showed some additional benefit in terms of change in IRLS at Week 12. Choice of RLS drugs requires careful evaluation of effectiveness and safety profiles in clinical practice. Due to lack of head-to-head trials, inconsistency could not be assessed in our analysis. Head-to-head trials on a more homogeneous population are needed to validate the MTC results.
    Current Medical Research and Opinion 07/2014; 30(11):1-29. DOI:10.1185/03007995.2014.946124 · 2.37 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Movement disorders constitute a subspecialty of neurology focusing on a variety of conditions characterized by hypokinetic, hyperkinetic, or abnormally coordinated movements including, among others, tremor, dystonia, parkinsonism, myoclonus, chorea, ballismus, tics, restless limbs, and ataxia. The term "movement disorders" may be used to refer to either abnormal movements or syndromes that cause these abnormal movements. The classification of movement disorders is based on phenomenology, individual syndromes, or etiology. This article reviews terminology used to describe movement disorders, discusses individual movement disorders and their occurrence in patients with multiple sclerosis, and reviews treatment options.
    Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Clinics of North America 11/2013; 24(4):639-51. DOI:10.1016/j.pmr.2013.06.003 · 1.09 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
33 Downloads
Available from
May 27, 2014