Acute bipolar mania: a systematic review and meta-analysis of co-therapy vs. monotherapy

South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, Londinium, England, United Kingdom
Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica (Impact Factor: 5.55). 02/2007; 115(1):12-20. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0447.2006.00912.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The aim of this meta-analysis was to systematically review the effectiveness of co-therapy compared with monotherapy for people with bipolar mania.
MEDLINE, Embase, Psychinfo, The Cochrane Library and reference lists of retrieved studies were searched without language restrictions for randomized controlled trials evaluating co-therapy compared with monotherapy for acute bipolar mania. Each trial was assessed for susceptibility to bias. Data on mania outcomes, withdrawals, extrapyramidal symptoms and weight were extracted and pooled effect estimates summarized as relative risks (RR) or differences in mean values (MD) where appropriate.
Eight eligible studies were included (1124 participants). Significant reductions in mania (Young Mania Rating Scale, YMRS) scores were shown for haloperidol, olanzapine, risperidone and quetiapine as co-therapy compared with monotherapy with a mood stabilizer. For atypical antipsychotics combined, the pooled difference in mean scores was 4.41 (95% CI: 2.74, 6.07). Significantly more participants on co-therapy met the response criterion (at least 50% reduction in YMRS score), RR 1.53 (1.31, 1.80). With some drugs, co-therapy decreased tolerability compared with monotherapy, and resulted in greater weight gain. There were insufficient data to compare one co-therapy regimen with another.
The addition of antipsychotic treatment to established mood-stabilizer treatment is more effective than mood-stabilizer treatment alone.

1 Bookmark
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Treating pregnant women with bipolar disorder is among the most challenging clinical endeavors. Patients and clinicians are faced with difficult choices at every turn, and no approach is without risk. Stopping effective pharmacotherapy during pregnancy exposes the patient and her baby to potential harms related to bipolar relapses and residual mood symptom-related dysfunction. Continuing effective pharmacotherapy during pregnancy may prevent these occurrences for many; however, some of the most effective pharmacotherapies (such as valproate) have been associated with the occurrence of congenital malformations or other adverse neonatal effects in offspring. Very little is known about the reproductive safety profile and clinical effectiveness of atypical antipsychotic drugs when used to treat bipolar disorder during pregnancy. In this paper, we provide a clinically focused review of the available information on potential maternal and fetal risks of untreated or undertreated maternal bipolar disorder during pregnancy, the effectiveness of interventions for bipolar disorder management during pregnancy, and potential obstetric, fetal, and neonatal risks associated with core foundational pharmacotherapies for bipolar disorder.
    Drug, Healthcare and Patient Safety 01/2015; 7:7-29. DOI:10.2147/DHPS.S50556
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The use of combination therapy with mood stabilizers and antipsychotics in acute mania in bipolar disorder (BD) is widespread, although most treatment guidelines recommend monotherapy as the first option, and reserve combination therapy, which is associated with more frequent and more severe side effects, for when patients do not respond to the former treatment option. Reasons to prescribe combination therapy include the lack of efficacy of the current treatment (either real or due to undisclosed poor adherence), psychiatric comorbidities, severe previous course of illness, slow cross-tapering during treatment switching, and potential benefits from particular combinations. The decision to start with monotherapy or combination therapy may depend on the patient characteristics, and is still under debate. Clinical trials designed to ascertain whether combination therapy or monotherapy is more advantageous for patients in acute mania and beyond, according to illness severity, are urgently needed. Adding a third monotherapy arm to the conventional two-arm, adjunctive-design trials or initiating combination therapy from the beginning may help to shed some light on the issue.
    CNS Drugs 02/2015; DOI:10.1007/s40263-015-0235-1 · 4.38 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To constitute the third revision of the guidelines for the treatment of bipolar disorder issued by the Korean Medication Algorithm Project for Bipolar Disorder (KMAP-BP 2014). A 56-item questionnaire was used to obtain the consensus of experts regarding pharmacological treatment strategies for the various phases of bipolar disorder and for special populations. The review committee included 110 Korean psychiatrists and 38 experts for child and adolescent psychiatry. Of the committee members, 64 general psychiatrists and 23 child and adolescent psychiatrists responded to the survey. The treatment of choice (TOC) for euphoric, mixed, and psychotic mania was the combination of a mood stabilizer (MS) and an atypical antipsychotic (AAP); the TOC for acute mild depression was monotherapy with MS or AAP; and the TOC for moderate or severe depression was MS plus AAP/antidepressant. The first-line maintenance treatment following mania or depression was MS monotherapy or MS plus AAP; the first-line treatment after mania was AAP monotherapy; and the first-line treatment after depression was lamotrigine (LTG) monotherapy, LTG plus MS/AAP, or MS plus AAP plus LTG. The first-line treatment strategy for mania in children and adolescents was MS plus AAP or AAP monotherapy. For geriatric bipolar patients, the TOC for mania was AAP/MS monotherapy, and the TOC for depression was AAP plus MS or AAP monotherapy. The expert consensus in the KMAP-BP 2014 differed from that in previous publications; most notably, the preference for AAP was increased in the treatment of acute mania, depression, and maintenance treatment. There was increased expert preference for the use of AAP and LTG. The major limitation of the present study is that it was based on the consensus of Korean experts rather than on experimental evidence.
    Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment 01/2015; 11:493-506. DOI:10.2147/NDT.S77838 · 2.00 Impact Factor


Available from
May 29, 2014