Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21542658›Full record

ReviewDrugs & aging2011

Effects of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors on platelet function: mechanisms, clinical outcomes and implications for use in elderly patients.

Francisco J de Abajo

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Drugs & aging, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 70 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
70citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

70 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 201 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Francisco J de AbajoClinical Pharmacology Unit, Hospital Universitario Príncipe de Asturias, Madrid, Spain.
Hospital Universitario Príncipe de Asturias · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Among the antidepressants, the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are often preferred to other classes of antidepressants in the treatment of depression in the elderly because of their better safety profile. Most of the known effects of SSRIs, either beneficial or adverse, are linked to their inhibitory action on the serotonin reuptake transporter (5-HTT). This reuptake mechanism is present not only in neurons but also in other cells such as platelets. Serotoninergic mechanisms seem to play an important role in haemostasis, and their importance in this regard has long been underestimated. Abnormal activation may lead to a pro-thrombotic state, as may occur in patients with major depressive disorder, whilst downregulation, as occurs in patients treated with SSRIs, may have two clinical consequences, both of particular interest in the elderly. On the one hand, there may be an increased risk of bleeding; on the other hand, a reduction in thrombotic risk may be possible. Polymorphism in the promoter region of the gene that transcribes the 5-HTT has been shown to have a relevant impact on its function and, in turn, on the beneficial and adverse effects of SSRIs. Bleeding has been a concern since the introduction of SSRIs, with multiple case reports published and communicated to the pharmacovigilance systems. The first epidemiological study was published in 1999 and since then, 34 epidemiological studies from different areas, most of them including elderly patients in their study populations, have been published with a variety of results. Broadly, the epidemiological evidence supports a moderately increased risk of bleeding associated with the use of SSRIs, which may be critically dependent on patient susceptibility and the presence of risk factors. The impairment of primary haemostasis induced by SSRIs may result, as a beneficial counterpart, in a reduction in the thrombotic risk. A small number of clinical trials and an increasing number of epidemiological studies that include elderly patients have been conducted to clarify whether SSRIs reduce the risk of primary and secondary ischaemic disorders. However, the results have been inconclusive with some studies suggesting a preventive effect and others no effect or even an increased risk. Behind such contradictory results may be the role of depression itself as a cardiovascular risk factor and, therefore, a major confounding factor. How to disentangle its effect from that of the antidepressants is the methodological challenge to be overcome in future studies. In this complex scenario, the elderly seem to be at a crossroads, because they are the group in which both the risks and the benefits can be the greatest. Studies performed to date have provided us with some clues that can help orient clinicians in taking the most appropriate course of action. For instance, as the gastrointestinal bleeding risk appears to increase with age, prudent advice in patients with a previous history of upper-gastrointestinal bleeding or peptic ulcer, and in those who take NSAIDs, oral anticoagulants, antiplatelet drugs or corticosteroids, would be to suggest addition of an acid-suppressing agent to the drug regimen in those elderly patients in whom SSRIs are indicated.

Indexed as

AgedBlood PlateletsFibrinolytic AgentsHemorrhageHumansPrognosisSelective Serotonin Reuptake InhibitorsFibrinolytic AgentsSelective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID21542658
OpenAlexW1906251018

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.