Amitriptyline versus placebo for major depressive disorder
Citation: Leucht C., Huhn M., Leucht S. Amitriptyline versus placebo for major depressive disorder. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 12. Art. No.: CD009138. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009138.pub2.
Evidence from review shows amitriptyline is an effective treatment for major depressive disorder which is associated with a number of adverse effects.
Amitriptyline is a tricyclic antidepressant that was synthesised in 1960, introduced as early as 1961 in the USA, and still regularly used. This review assesses the effects of amitriptyline compared to placebo or no treatment for major depressive disorder in adults. It includes 39 trials with a total of 3509 participants and confirms amitriptyline efficacy compared to placebo or no treatment. This finding is important, because the efficacy of antidepressants has recently been questioned. However, the review also demonstrated that amitriptyline produces a number of side effects such as vision problems, constipation and sedation. It is a limitation of this review that many studies have been poorly reported, which might have led to bias. As data on death were not reported, this review could not clarify whether amitriptyline increases mortality by its side effects or reduces it by preventing suicides. However, due to its relatively well‐documented efficacy together with its low cost (amitriptyline is available as a generic drug, and inexpensive in at least some countries) amitriptyline should not be forgotten as a treatment option, especially for those patients who have not responded to safer drugs.
Disclaimer: This summary has been written by staff and volunteers of Evidence Aid in order to make the content of the original document accessible to decision makers who are searching for the available evidence on the health of refugees and asylum seekers but may not have the time, initially, to read the original report in full. This summary is not intended as a substitute for the medical advice of physicians, other health workers, professional associations, guideline developers, or national governments and international agencies. If readers of this summary think that the evidence that is presented within it is relevant to their decision-making they should refer to the content and details of the original article, and the advice and guidelines offered by other sources of expertise, before making decisions. Evidence Aid cannot be held responsible for any decisions made about the health of refugees and asylum seekers on the basis of this summary alone.
If you have found this summary helpful, please consider making a donation. If everyone who looked at our COVID-19 resources gave us just £2 per month, it would fund Evidence Aid’s life-saving work.