Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34705064›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2022

Use of ketamine and esketamine for depression: an overview of systematic reviews with meta-analyses.

Tácio de Mendonça Lima, Marília Berlofa Visacri, Patricia Melo Aguiar

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Quantitative evaluation of multiple treatment regimens for treatment-resistant depression.The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Treating Treatment-resistant Depression with Esketamine Nasal Spray When All Therapeutic Options Have Been Exhausted: Clinical Experience from a Spanish Cohort of Expanded Use.Clinical psychopharmacology and neuroscience : the official scientific journal of the Korean College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2024
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Ketamine, an Old-New Drug: Uses and Abuses.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  16. Amantadine in Treatment of Dysthymia-The Pilot Case Series Study.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. 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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Tácio de Mendonça LimaDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Federal Rural University of Rio de Janeiro, Seropédica, RJ, Brazil.
Marília Berlofa VisacriDepartment of Pharmacology, School of Medical Sciences, University of Campinas, Campinas, SP, Brazil.
Patricia Melo AguiarDepartment of Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of São Paulo, Av. Prof. Lineu Prestes, 580 - Conj. das Químicas - Bloco 13 - Cidade Universitária Butantã, São Paulo, SP, Brazil. aguiar.pm@usp.br.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3957-4533
Universidade de São Paulo · BRUniversidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) · BRUniversidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo summarize the evidence of efficacy and safety of the use of ketamine and esketamine for depression.

methodsA literature search was performed in Medline, the Cochrane Library, LILACS, and CRD until November 2020. We included systematic reviews with meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials on the use of ketamine and esketamine in adult patients with depression. Two authors independently performed the study selection and data extraction. The AMSTAR-2 tool was used to appraise the quality of included reviews.

resultsA total of 118 records were identified, and 11 studies fully met the eligibility criteria. Compared to control, ketamine improved the clinical response at 40 min to 1 week and clinical remission at 80 min to 72 h, and esketamine improved both outcomes at 2 h to 4 weeks. Ketamine and esketamine also had a beneficial effect on the depression scales score and suicidality. For adverse events, oral ketamine did not show significant change compared to control, while intranasal esketamine showed difference for any events, such as dissociation, dizziness, hypoesthesia, and vertigo. Most reviews were classified as "critically low quality," and none of them declared the source of funding of the primary studies and assessed the potential impact of risk of bias in primary studies.

conclusionKetamine and esketamine showed a significant antidepressant action within a few hours or days after administration; however, the long-term efficacy and safety are lacking. In addition, the methodological quality of the reviews was usually critically low, which may indicate the need for higher quality evidence in relation to the theme.

Indexed as

Antidepressive AgentsDepressive DisorderHumansKetamineMeta-Analysis as TopicRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSuicidal IdeationSystematic Reviews as TopicAntidepressive AgentsEsketamineKetamineDepressionEsketamineKetamineMental disordersOverviewSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID34705064
OpenAlexW3211285041

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.