Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20297860›Full record

SynthesisDrug safety2010

Cerebrovascular accidents in elderly people treated with antipsychotic drugs: a systematic review.

Emilio Sacchetti, Cesare Turrina, Paolo Valsecchi

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Drug safety, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 112 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Antidepressants for agitation and psychosis in dementia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2011
    Pooled it
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. COVID-19 and Antipsychotic Therapy: Unraveling the Thrombosis Risk.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Emilio SacchettiDepartment of Psychiatry, Brescia University School of Medicine, Brescia, Italy. sacchett@med.unibs.it
Cesare Turrina
Paolo Valsecchi
Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale degli Spedali Civili di Brescia · ITUniversity of Brescia · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

After 2002, an association between stroke and antipsychotic use was reported in clinical trials and large database studies. This review considers previous quantitative reviews, newly published clinical trials, and recent observational cohort and case-control studies, and focuses on the clinical significance of the risk for stroke, the difference between typical and atypical antipsychotics, the possible at-risk patient profile and the timing of stroke after exposure. A search of MEDLINE covering the period from 1966 to June 2009 was carried out using selected keywords. Inclusion criteria were (i) quantitative reviews on stroke and antipsychotics; (ii) double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials involving patients with dementia treated with antipsychotics; and (iii) observational database cohort studies and observational case-control studies investigating the association between stroke and antipsychotics. Clinical trials were excluded if they were single-blind or if patients were affected by dementia and/or other neurological illnesses. Four reviews with aggregate data, 2 meta-analyses, 13 randomized, double-blind, controlled trials, 7 observational cohort studies and 4 observational case-control studies were selected and analysed. The incidence of cerebrovascular accidents (CVAs) was found to be very low in aggregate reviews and meta-analyses (2-4%). When the number collected was sufficiently high, or different drug treatments were grouped together, the higher rate in subjects exposed to antipsychotics was statistically significant. Inspection of other randomized controlled clinical trials, not included in aggregate reviews and meta-analyses, reported similar rates of CVAs. The majority of observational cohort studies compared typical and atypical antipsychotics and no significant class differences were found. A comparison with non-users was carried out in some cohort studies. In case-control studies, the probability of CVAs in users compared with non-users was in the range of 1.3- to 2-fold greater. Preliminary data also indicate that the highest risk of stroke is related to the first weeks of treatment, and a risk profile for stroke is emerging, such as older age, cognitive impairment and vascular illness. Different pathophysiological pathways may be involved, ranging from the facilitation of thrombosis, pre-existing cardiovascular factors, sedation and a common diathesis for stroke of dementia, schizophrenia and affective illness. Before prescribing an antipsychotic, clinicians should weigh all the risk factors for a given patient and consider not only the indications as provided by the regulatory agencies, but also the overall effectiveness of typical and atypical antipsychotics.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overAntipsychotic AgentsBrainCase-Control StudiesCohort StudiesHumansMental DisordersRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRisk FactorsStrokeAntipsychotic Agents

Identifiers

PMID20297860
OpenAlexW2196887120

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.