Oxcarbazepine--efficacy and tolerability during treatment of alcohol withdrawal: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled multicenter pilot study. Carbamazepine versus oxazepam in the treatment of alcohol withdrawal: a double-blind study. Effects of beta-blocking drugs in alcohol withdrawal: a double-blind comparative study with propranolol and diazepam. Treating alcohol withdrawal with oral baclofen: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Enlarged double-blind randomised trial of benzodiazepines against psychotropic analgesic nitrous oxide for alcohol withdrawal. Double-blind study of alprazolam, diazepam, clonidine, and placebo in the alcohol withdrawal syndrome: preliminary findings. Ambulant treatment of alcohol withdrawal symptoms with carbamazepine: a formal multicentre doubl-blind comparison with placebo. Symptom-triggered vs fixed-schedule doses of benzodiazepine for alcohol withdrawal: a randomized treatment trial. Comparison of two benzodiazepines in the treatment of alcohol withdrawal: effects on symptoms and cognitive recovery. Placebo-controlled trial of intravenous diphenylhydantoin for short-term treatment of alcohol withdrawal seizures. Oxcarbazepine versus carbamazepine in the treatment of alcohol withdrawal. A double-blind comparison of carbamazepine and clomethiazole in the treatment of alcohol withdrawal syndrome. Treatment of alcohol withdrawal: chlormethiazole vs. carbamazepine and the effect on memory performance--a pilot study. Clinical symptomatology and computer analyzed EEG before, during and after anxiolytic therapy of alcohol withdrawal patients. Gamma-hydroxybutyric acid (GHB) in the treatment of alcohol withdrawal syndrome: a randomized comparative study versus benzodiazepine. Efficacy of kava-kava in the treatment of non-psychotic anxiety, following pretreatment with benzodiazepines. Antiglutamatergic strategies for ethanol detoxification: comparison with placebo and diazepam. Alcohol withdrawal treatment in intoxicated vs non-intoxicated patients: a controlled open-label study with tiapride/carbamazepine, clomethiazole and diazepam. [Gamma-hydroxybutyrate for treatment of alcohol withdrawal syndrome in intensive care patients. A comparison between with two symptom-oriented therapeutic concepts]. Double-blind trial of alprazolam and chlordiazepoxide in the management of the acute ethanol withdrawal syndrome. Double blind study on the efficacy and safety of tetrabamate and chlordiazepoxide in the treatment of the acute alcohol withdrawal syndrome. Double-blind comparison of lorazepam and chlordiazepoxide in the treatment of the acute alcohol abstinence syndrome. Divalproex sodium (Depakote) for alcohol withdrawal and relapse prevention. A double-blind comparison of abecarnil and diazepam in the treatment of uncomplicated alcohol withdrawal. Double-blind controlled trial comparing carbamazepine to oxazepam treatment of alcohol withdrawal. Educating physicians to reduce benzodiazepine use by elderly patients: a randomized controlled trial. Emergency department treatment of alcohol withdrawal seizures with phenytoin. A comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of clobazam and chlordiazepoxide in the treatment of acute withdrawal from alcohol in patients with primary alcoholism. A randomised open multicentre comparative trial of lamotrigine and carbamazepine as monotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed or recurrent epilepsy. A pilot trial of olanzapine for the treatment of cocaine dependence. Safety and efficacy of vigabatrin and carbamazepine in newly diagnosed epilepsy: a multicentre randomised double-blind study. Vigabatrin European Monotherapy Study Group. Double-blind comparison of lamotrigine and carbamazepine in newly diagnosed epilepsy. UK Lamotrigine/Carbamazepine Monotherapy Trial Group. Carbamazepine as an adjunct of antipsychotic therapy. Clobazam in therapy-resistant patients with partial epilepsy: a double-blind placebo-controlled crossover study. Treatment of acute alcohol withdrawal syndrome with carbamazepine: a double-blind comparison with tiapride. The effects of carbamazepine and lorazepam on single versus multiple previous alcohol withdrawals in an outpatient randomized trial. Double-blind comparison of alprazolam and diazepam for subchronic withdrawal from alcohol. Treatment of acute alcohol withdrawal with gabapentin: results from a controlled two-center trial. Anticholinergic challenge and neuroleptic withdrawal. Changes in dyskinesia and symptom measures. Treatment of alcohol withdrawal symptoms in hospitalized patients. A randomized, double-blind comparison of carbamazepine (Tegretol) and barbital (Diemal). Tiapride and chlordiazepoxide in acute alcohol withdrawal. A controlled clinical trial. Propranolol versus diazepam in the management of the alcohol withdrawal syndrome: double-blind controlled trial. The treatment of tranquilizer dependence by propranolol. Efficacy and safety of eslicarbazepine acetate as adjunctive treatment in adults with refractory partial-onset seizures: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group phase III study. Controlled trial of lamotrigine (Lamictal) for refractory partial seizures. Comparative efficacy and safety of atypical and conventional antipsychotic drugs in first-episode psychosis: a randomized, double-blind trial of olanzapine versus haloperidol. Comparative efficacy of propranolol and chlordiazepoxide in alcohol withdrawal. A randomized trial of a program to reduce the use of psychoactive drugs in nursing homes. A randomized, double-blind comparison of lorazepam and chlordiazepoxide in patients with uncomplicated alcohol withdrawal. Eslicarbazepine acetate as adjunctive therapy in adult patients with partial epilepsy. Efficacy and safety of 800 and 1200 mg eslicarbazepine acetate as adjunctive treatment in adults with refractory partial-onset seizures. The effect of industry-independent drug information on the prescribing of benzodiazepines in general practice. Double-blind, placebo-controlled study of topiramate in patients with refractory partial epilepsy. Combined treatment of schizophrenic psychoses with haloperidol and valproate. Eslicarbazepine acetate: a double-blind, add-on, placebo-controlled exploratory trial in adult patients with partial-onset seizures.
Alcohol withdrawal syndrome (AWS) is a serious complication of alcohol dependence and often requires intensive medical treatment. Antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) have been shown to be as efficacious in the treatment of AWS in several controlled trials as benzodiazepines and superior to placebo in relieving alcohol withdrawal symptoms. Oxcarbazepine (OXC), a newer anticonvulsive drug, has a favorable safety profile over carbamazepine (CBZ) and other older AEDs due to its excellent efficacy and better side-effect profile.
                The efficacy and tolerability of OXC versus placebo were investigated in 50 inpatients during a 6-day treatment of alcohol withdrawal in a 4-site, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled pilot study. The amount of rescue medication of clomethiazole (CLO) capsules needed was chosen as the primary variable. The data were collected between May 2003 and September 2004.
                No initial differences were found regarding sociodemographic data and alcohol-related parameters, indicating successful randomization. No differences were found in the need for rescue medication CLO, decrease of withdrawal symptoms, or craving for alcohol between the OXC and the placebo group. Subjectively experienced side effects, normalization of vegetative parameters, craving, or improvement of psychopathological parameters were not different between the groups.
                Despite the negative finding, which may be attributable to the design of the study, OXC still poses an interesting alternative to CBZ and other drugs because other studies have found it not only as efficient but also as having no addictive potential, while additionally possessing an anti-craving effect. Therefore, well-designed investigations with larger cohorts are required to further elucidate this issue. The use of more than 130 drugs and drug combinations against the alcohol withdrawal syndrome reflects the fact that views on its treatment are far from being unequivocal. Benzodiazepines are the first choice treatment but it should not be disregarded that they have side effects and, above all, a varying risk of dependency themselves. In recent years many trials have focused on carbamazepine in this respect. Its efficacy was proven in various open and double-blind studies, most of them using concomitant sedative drugs, thereby diminishing the reliability of the results. In a double-blind study we compared the efficacy of carbamazepine with that of oxazepam, in 60 in-patients suffering from alcohol withdrawal syndrome. The main rating instrument was the Clinical Institute Withdrawal Scale--Alcohol (CIWA-A). The 7-day trial showed equal efficacy of carbamazepine and oxazepam during the first 5 days and a statistically significant superiority of carbamazepine on days 6 and 7. Four patients in each group had to be dropped from the study due to side effects or after having withdrawn informed consent. There was no decrease in white blood counts under carbamazepine. The experiences with carbamazepine up to now suggest a more widespread use, especially in non-delirious withdrawal states. Alcohol withdrawal is associated with a decrease in gamma-aminobutyric acid neurotransmission. This explains the efficacy of benzodiazepines. However, an increase in adrenergic activity may also play a part in alcohol withdrawal symptoms, suggesting a potential efficacy of beta-blocking drugs. A double-blind comparative study of propranolol and diazepam was carried out in 28 patients suffering from moderate uncomplicated alcohol withdrawal. Patients were treated for 15 days with either 75 mg of propranolol or 30 mg of diazepam. The results show that both drugs at the dosages used are equipotent in reducing physical withdrawal symptoms and anxiety symptoms. This suggests that most likely the central as well as the peripheral effects determine the clinical usefulness of propranolol in the management of alcohol withdrawal. However, propranolol is ineffective in preventing major motor seizures, suggesting that different neurobiological mechanisms underlie the alcohol withdrawal symptoms. Abrupt cessation of alcohol intake causes habituated drinkers to experience symptoms of alcohol withdrawal syndrome (AWS).
                To determine the effect of the gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA)-B agonist baclofen on the course of acute symptomatic AWS.
                Prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical study.
                Two tertiary-care hospitals in Duluth, Minnesota.
                Inpatient adults admitted for any reason (including AWS) judged to be at high risk for AWS.
                Inpatients who developed symptoms of AWS received symptom-triggered benzodiazepine treatment using lorazepam by standard protocol, and were randomized to receive baclofen 10 mg or placebo, 3 times per day, orally.
                AWS severity was assessed using the Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment of Alcohol Scale, Revised (CIWA-Ar); lorazepam dose was monitored.
                Seventy-nine subjects were enrolled. The 44 subjects who developed symptoms of AWS were randomized to baclofen or placebo. Thirty-one subjects (18 baclofen, 13 placebo) completed 72 hours of assessments, either entirely as inpatients or with outpatient follow-up. The need for high doses of benzodiazepines (20 mg or more of lorazepam over 72 hours) to control AWS was less likely in the baclofen treatment group (1 of 18) than in the placebo-treated group (7 of 13) (P = 0.004).
                We found that the use of baclofen was associated with a significant reduction in the use of high doses of benzodiazepine (lorazepam) in the management of symptomatic AWS. The use of low-dose baclofen in the management of AWS deserves further study, as reduced dependence on high-dose benzodiazepines in AWS management could improve patient safety.
                Copyright © 2011 Society of Hospital Medicine. We report a randomised double-blind controlled study with an enlarged cohort of participants (N = 51) using psychotropic analgesic nitrous oxide (PAN) versus benzodiazepines (BZs) for treating acute alcoholic withdrawal states. An additional 28 participants having received a BZ the night previous to the study were pooled with the previously analysed 23 (with no additional BZ). These pooled results showed that PAN is superior to a BZ regimen at P = .05 level, despite additional BZs. Our work provides further support for previous findings that show that PAN is a safe, rapid, and effective therapy for acute mild to moderately severe withdrawal states. Both a reduction in the inhibitory effects of GABA (disinhibition) and activation of the sympathetic nervous system are manifested during the alcohol withdrawal syndrome. This study was designed to explore the relative efficacy of medications that differentially affects these two biological systems: the benzodiazepines, which attenuate GABAergic disinhibition, and the alpha 2-adrenergic receptor agonists, which decrease sympathetic activation. The benzodiazepine diazepam (n = 6), the alpha 2-receptor agonist clonidine (n = 7), the benzodiazepine alprazolam (this is also purported to have alpha 2-receptor agonist properties) (n = 6), and placebo (n = 6) were evaluated in their effectiveness in decreasing signs and symptoms of alcohol withdrawal. Drug-free, alcohol-dependent patients were administered 1 of the 4 medications in a double-blind design until symptoms of withdrawal, as measured by the Clinical Instrument Withdrawal Assessment for Alcohol-Revised, were successfully treated. Alprazolam was significantly more efficacious than both clonidine and placebo in decreasing withdrawal symptoms. Diazepam was more effective than clonidine and placebo on some measures of withdrawal. Clonidine decreased systolic blood pressure significantly more than the other two active drugs and placebo, but was no more effective than placebo in decreasing other symptoms of withdrawal. Alprazolam did not significantly decrease blood pressure compared with diazepam or placebo. Despite the small sample size, these preliminary findings suggest that the efficacy of alprazolam in the treatment of alcohol withdrawal is related to its effect at the benzodiazepine receptor and not its alpha 2-receptor agonist properties. One hundred male out-patients were treated for alcohol withdrawal symptoms with either carbamazepine or placebo in a double-blind, multicentre trial carried out a five Finnish A-clinics (alcoholism treatment centres) in different parts of the country. In both the carbamazepine and the placebo groups two thirds of the patients completed the 7-day treatment successfully, and the final treatment results were considered equally good in both groups. However, the withdrawal symptoms, especially the sleep disturbances, subsided faster in the carbamazepine group than in the placebo group. The change in the total symptom score from the first day of treatment to the second was significantly greater in the carbamazepine group than in the placebo group. The patients' ability to work improved significantly faster in the carbamazepine group. In alcohol withdrawal, fixed doses of benzodiazepine are generally recommended as a first-line pharmacologic approach. This study determines the benefits of an individualized treatment regimen on the quantity of benzodiazepine administered and the duration of its use during alcohol withdrawal treatment.
                We conducted a prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial including 117 consecutive patients with alcohol dependence, according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, entering an alcohol treatment program at both the Lausanne and Geneva university hospitals, Switzerland. Patients were randomized into 2 groups: (1) 56 were treated with oxazepam in response to the development of signs of alcohol withdrawal (symptom-triggered); and (2) 61 were treated with oxazepam every 6 hours with additional doses as needed (fixed-schedule). The administration of oxazepam in group 1 and additional oxazepam in group 2 was determined using a standardized measure of alcohol withdrawal. The main outcome measures were the total amount and duration of treatment with oxazepam, the incidence of complications, and the comfort level.
                A total of 22 patients (39%) in the symptom-triggered group were treated with oxazepam vs 100% in the fixed-schedule group (P<.001). The mean oxazepam dose administered in the symptom-triggered group was 37.5 mg compared with 231.4 mg in the fixed-schedule group (P<.001). The mean duration of oxazepam treatment was 20.0 hours in the symptom-triggered group vs 62.7 hours in the fixed-schedule group (P<.001). Withdrawal complications were limited to a single episode of seizures in the symptom-triggered group. There were no differences in the measures of comfort between the 2 groups.
                Symptom-triggered benzodiazepine treatment for alcohol withdrawal is safe, comfortable, and associated with a decrease in the quantity of medication and duration of treatment. Forty newly admitted alcohol-dependent patients were randomly allocated to equivalent 6-day regimes of either lorazepam or diazepam, to compare involvement in physical, emotional and cognitive state during the first 8 days in hospital. Diazepam provided a more comfortable withdrawal period and was associated with slightly better cognitive functioning on the eighth day. Despite conflicting experimental and clinical evidence, diphenylhydantoin continues to be used for the treatment of alcohol withdrawal seizures in emergency departments and alcohol detoxification centers. Our goal was to evaluate the effectiveness of intravenous diphenylhydantoin for prevention of alcohol withdrawal seizures in high-risk patients using a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study design.
                Ninety alcoholic patients, enrolled within six hours of the initial alcohol-related seizure in a withdrawal episode, were randomly assigned to treatment with intravenous diphenylhydantoin (1,000 mg) or placebo. Seventy-one patients had a history of seizures during prior alcohol withdrawal episodes. Patients with a history of seizures unrelated to alcohol withdrawal were excluded. Drugs known to affect the seizure threshold or demonstrating cross-tolerance with alcohol were withheld. For each patient, the study endpoint was either (1) seizure recurrence or (2) a minimum 12-hour seizure-free observation period after completion of the study drug infusion.
                During the postinfusion observation period, six of 45 diphenylhydantoin-treated patients and six of 45 placebo-treated patients experienced at least one recurrent seizure. Equivalent diphenylhydantoin serum levels were measured in patients with and without subsequent seizures. There was no statistically significant difference between the response rates for the two treatments (p greater than 0.05). The 95% confidence interval for the difference in response probabilities was -14.0%, 14%.
                When administered to non-epileptic patients within six hours of the onset of alcohol withdrawal seizures, intravenous diphenylhydantoin failed to show a significant benefit over placebo in the prevention of subsequent seizures. We suggest that the well-documented risks of intravenous diphenylhydantoin therapy outweigh the potential benefit in the short-term treatment of alcohol withdrawal seizures. In a single-blinded and randomized pilot study efficacy and tolerability of oxcarbazepine versus carbamazepine were investigated in 29 patients during therapy of alcohol withdrawal. No initial differences were found regarding sociodemographic data and alcohol-related parameters, indicating successful randomization. The oxcarbazepine group showed a significant decrease of withdrawal symptoms and reported significantly less 'craving for alcohol' compared to the carbamazepine group. Subjectively experienced side effects, normalization of vegetative parameters and improvement in the cognitive processing speed did not reveal differences for both groups. Therefore, oxcarbazepine might be an interesting alternative to carbamazepine, and having almost no addictive potential, no clinically relevant interaction with alcohol and no prominent sedatory effect, possibly also to other drugs such as benzodiazepines or clomethiazole, in the treatment of alcohol withdrawal syndrome. The efficacy and tolerability of carbamazepine and clomethiazole in the treatment of alcohol withdrawal symptoms were compared in a double-blind study with 68 hospitalized patients. Target withdrawal symptoms, the patient's subjective feeling and unwanted effects were recorded daily during the 1 week-treatment period. No significant differences between the two treatments could be demonstrated in the parameters studied. It appears that carbamazepine, which is widely used as an antiepileptic drug, well tolerated and not likely to produce any addiction as such, might offer a valuable alternative treatment for the symptoms of alcohol withdrawal. Although relatively little attention has been paid to the question how acute alcohol withdrawal might affect cognitive functions, this factor remains of particular interest because it influences psychotherapeutic treatment during detoxification. The clinical outcome and neuropsychological state of 37 inpatients with alcohol withdrawal was investigated in a randomized single-blind approach. Two different medical strategies [chlormethiazole (CMZ) vs. carbamazepine (CBZ)] in the treatment of inpatients with alcohol withdrawal syndrome were compared. Among comparable groups (related to gender, age, initial alcohol level, severity of abuses, severity of initial withdrawal symptoms such as tremor, perspiration, psychomotor agitation, hallucinations, orientation, intelligence, patient demographics), CBZ is just as potent as CMZ in therapy of withdrawal symptoms (circulatory function, vegetative function, psychomotor activity). Patients in both groups showed initial impairments in some neuropsychological tests (d2, Zahlen-Verbundings test, Beck Depression Inventory, Anxiety Sensitivity Index) with significant improvement during detoxification. Additionally, CBZ-treated patients showed significantly better verbal memory performance during the first days of treatment. Without any addictive potential, CBZ therapy could be very supportive in alcohol detoxification. In addition a higher verbal memory performance state could be favourable for a psychotherapeutic approach. In a double-blind study the clinical symptomatology and quantitatively analyzed EEG of 42 hospitalized chronic alcoholics (ICD 303) undergoing alcohol withdrawal were investigated before, during and after 3 weeks' treatment with 2 pharmacokinetically different benzodiazepines: the short-acting lopirazepam (a new pyridodiazepine) and the long-acting prazepam. At the end of weeks 1 and 3 the titrated optimal daily doses were 24 and 23 mg lopirazepam and 35 and 32 prazepam, respectively, thus confirming our earlier pharmaco-EEG predictions that on a mg to mg basis the former drug is slightly more CNS potent than the latter. Thereafter, the patient population was divided into 6 subgroups: 2 groups continuing on active medication, 2 groups receiving placebo, and 2 groups with no pharmacotherapy for 1 week. Clinical assessments included the CGI, the Hamilton Anxiety Score, the Zung Self-Rating Scale for Anxiety and Depression, the Zerssen Befindlichkeitsskala and the questionnaire for somatic findings and side effect and were carried out on days 0, 7, 21 and 28 as was a radioreceptor assay for benzodiazepines in plasma. Quantitative EEG investigations were carried out on days 0, 21 and 28 and included recordings before and 2 h after one single dose of 10 mg. Statistical analysis demonstrated a marked and highly significant decrease in psychopathology as well as good drug tolerance at the end of the first week of therapy and thereafter a slight continuation in improvement until the end of the 3rd week. There were, however, no statistically significant differences between the 2 active compounds, nor were there any statistically significant differences between the 6 subgroups in the 4th week. On the other hand, blood level investigations demonstrated that even after a 3-week treatment period, blood levels dropped down to a morning minimum 12 h after the last evening medication of the short-acting lopirazepam, while plasma levels of the long-acting prazepam remained high. This was also reflected in the spectral analyzed EEG, which showed, after one single dosage of both drugs, a typical anxiolytic profile which was more pronounced after lopirazepam than prazepam, while after the chronic administration (12 h after the evening medication) only prazepam showed an anxiolytic profile. The lopirazepam-treated patients exhibited on the one hand a lack of benzodiazepine-specific alterations, but showed on the other hand EEG changes possibly reflecting clinical improvement. The relevance of the findings will be discussed. Benzodiazepine has been shown to be one of the most effective class of drugs in the management of alcohol withdrawal syndrome (AWS). Gamma-hydroxybutyric acid (GHB) has recently been introduced in the treatment of alcohol problems, including AWS. At present there are no comparative studies between benzodiazepines and GHB in AWS treatment. The aim of the present randomized, controlled, single-blind study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of GHB compared with diazepam in the treatment of AWS.
                Sixty alcoholics affected by AWS were enrolled in the study. Diazepam (0.5-0.75 mg/kg body weight for 6 days, tapering the dose 25% daily until day 10) was administered orally to 30 patients (25 males, 5 females; mean age 44.3 +/- 10.9 years); GHB (50 mg/kg body weight for 10 days) was administered orally to 30 patients (26 males,4 females; mean age 41.7 +/- 10.4 years). The Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment for Alcohol-revised scale (CIWA-Ar) was used to evaluate the AWS physical symptoms. The State Anxiety Inventory test for current anxiety assessment and the Zung self-rating Depression Scale for current depression assessment were performed.
                Eight patients (26.6%) in the diazepam group and 4 patients (13.3%) in the GHB group dropped out. Both treatments were effective in reducing AWS. No significant difference was found between the groups in CIWA-Ar total score at baseline and at the different times of observation. Considering the CIWA-Ar subscore and Zung scale, a significant reduction of anxiety on day 4 (p < 0.02), agitation on day 5 (p < 0.02) and time of recovery of depression on day 5 (p < 0.02) was observed in the GHB group with respect to the diazepam group. Drowsiness and vertigo developed after initial drug administration in the GHB (19.2%) and diazepam (36.4%) groups and quickly resolved in both groups.
                GHB is as effective in the management of AWS as benzodiazepine and it seems to be quicker in reducing anxiety, agitation, and depression. Both drugs are safe and well-tolerated in AWS management. A 5-week randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study was carried out to investigate the efficacy of kava-kava special extract WS1490 in non-psychotic nervous anxiety, tension and restlessness states. During the first treatment week, the study dose drug was increased from 50 mg to 300 mg per day and pretreatment with benzodiazepines was tapered off over 2 weeks. These dosage adjustments were followed by 3 weeks of monotherapy with WS1490 or placebo. Outcome measures were the differences between baseline and end of treatment on the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAMA) and on a subjective well-being scale (Bf-S), as well as the benzodiazepine withdrawal symptoms. Changes in the Erlanger Anxiety, Tension and Aggression Scale (EAAS) and Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) were analyzed as secondary measures. Treatment safety was checked by interviews, adverse event reports and laboratory investigations. Forty patients (2x20) were included into the study. WS1490 was superior to placebo regarding the HAMA (P=0.01) and Bf-S (P=0.002) total scores and all secondary efficacy measures. The tolerance of WS1490 was not inferior to placebo. The study confirms the anxiolytic efficacy and good tolerance of WS1490 and shows that a further symptom reduction is possible after a change-over from benzodiazepine treatment. Benzodiazepines are the standard pharmacotherapies for ethanol detoxification, but concerns about their abuse potential and negative effects upon the transition to alcohol abstinence drive the search for new treatments. Glutamatergic activation and glutamate receptor up-regulation contribute to ethanol dependence and withdrawal. This study compared 3 antiglutamatergic strategies for ethanol detoxification with placebo and to the benzodiazepine, diazepam: the glutamate release inhibitor, lamotrigine; the N-methyl-D-aspartate glutamate receptor antagonist, memantine; and the AMPA/kainite receptor inhibitor, topiramate.
                This placebo-controlled randomized single-blinded psychopharmacology trial studied male alcohol-dependent inpatients (n=127) with clinically significant alcohol withdrawal symptoms. Subjects were assigned to 1 of 5 treatments for 7 days: placebo, diazepam 10 mg TID, lamotrigine 25 mg QID, memantine 10 mg TID, or topiramate 25 mg QID. Additional diazepam was administered when the assigned medication failed to suppress withdrawal symptoms adequately.
                All active medications significantly reduced observer-rated and self-rated withdrawal severity, dysphoric mood, and supplementary diazepam administration compared with placebo. The active medications did not differ from diazepam.
                This study provides the first systematic clinical evidence supporting the efficacy of a number of antiglutamatergic approaches for treating alcohol withdrawal symptoms. These data support the hypothesis that glutamatergic activation contributes to human alcohol withdrawal. Definitive studies of each of these medications are now needed to further evaluate their effectiveness in treating alcohol withdrawal. Alcohol withdrawal treatment efficacy of tiapride/carbamazepine (A) vs clomethiazole (B) vs diazepam (C) in non-intoxicated patients and vs tiapride/carbamazepine in intoxicated patients (D; breath alcohol concentration > or = 1 g/l) was tested (n = 127) in a controlled randomized open-label study.
                Efficacy and safety were not different between groups (total group: delirium, 3.9%; seizure, 0.8%), except for a lack of efficacy in 18% of intoxicated tiapride/carbamazepine patients. A change of medication in this group was necessary only when primarily intoxicated patients had reached the non-intoxicated range.
                Treatment with tiapride/carbamazepine in alcohol-intoxicated patients proved to be safe. Seeing as gamma-hydroxybutyrate (GHB) and benzodiazepines interact with the GABA-transmitter system, we investigated whether GHB can replace the conventional therapy, which uses benzodiazepines in the treatment of alcohol withdrawal syndrome in ICU settings.
                42 chronic alcoholics were included in this prospective and randomized study. Following the development of alcohol withdrawal syndrome, the patients were randomly allocated to the GHB or to the flunitrazepam group. In addition to this, clonidine was administered in order to treat autonomic signs of withdrawal. In cases were hallucinations occurred, haloperidol was administered.
                There was no significant difference in the efficacy of treatment used in the duration of mechanical ventilation and intensive care unit stay between groups. The patients in the GHB-group required significantly higher dosages of haloperidol and significantly lower dosages of clonidine. 14 out of 21 patients from the GHB-group developed hypernatriaemia and 15 out of 21 developed a metabolic alkalosis.
                Symptoms of the autonomic nervous system were more effectively prevented by GHB as evident in the lower dosage requirement of clonidine. However, GHB may not sufficiently block the hyperactivity of the dopaminergic system or may have an hallucinogenic effect itself. This may be evident from the higher dosages of haloperidol which were necessary. Due to the latter fact, the administration of GHB cannot be recommended in all patients suffering from AWS in ICU settings. A sequential sample of 101 patients hospitalized for ethanol withdrawal and requiring sedation for evolving withdrawal syndromes was assigned randomly according to a double-blind protocol to treatment with either alprazolam or chlordiazepoxide administered orally. The data from one patient were unevaluable due to acute bleeding, leaving a sample of 100 (50 in each condition). At discharge, three independent ratings of diaphoresis, tremor, hallucinations, nausea/vomiting, and overall severity of withdrawal were obtained, and the occurrence of delirium tremens and grand mal seizures was noted. Patients also completed the Beck Depression Inventory, and their disposition following discharge was recorded. There were no statistically significant differences between the two treatment groups on any of the dependent variables studied. It was concluded that the choice between alprazolam and chlordiazepoxide for managing ethanol withdrawal should be based on criteria other than efficacy of control. Potential antidepressant effects and drug kinetics were suggested as the basis for rational decision-making. 1. Efficacy and safety of tetrabamate and chlordiazepoxide in the treatment of the acute or Primary Alcohol Withdrawal Syndrome (PAWS) were assessed during a randomized double blind clinical trial, carried out on sixty male alcoholic in-patients. 2. The two drugs were administered four times a day in double dummy conditions, according to a fixed-flexible decreasing dosage schedule (six days basic regimen). 3. Drug efficacy was measured daily throughout the study period using a battery of standard instruments for collecting quantitative clinical, behavioral, psychopathological and laboratory data. Side effects were daily recorded. 4. Tetrabamate was found to be as efficient as chlordiazepoxide in reducing the intensity of the PAWS, improving sleep and vital signs rapidly and alleviating anxiety progressively. 5. Tetrabamate was found particularly beneficial for severe tremor. Psychomotor and mood scores consistently favored tetrabamate, suggesting psychoanaleptic properties of this compound (increased diurnal vigilance). 6. Side effects were minimal with tetrabamate and generally of weak intensity with chlordiazepoxide. 7. The results of this study indicate that tetrabamate may represent a new alternative drug of choice for the therapy of the acute alcohol withdrawal syndrome. The anxiolytic efficacy and safety of lorazepam and chlordiazepoxide were evaluated and compared during a five-day double-blind trial in 50 male inpatients who were experiencing acute alcohol withdrawal symptoms. The total daily doses of lorazepam and chlordiazepoxide were tapered from 6 to 2 mg and from 150 to 50 mg, respectively, during the first four days; no medication was given on day 5. Drug effectiveness was measured by improvements in the total severity assessment score (TSAS), in the three composite TSAS factors, and by the physician's global rating. No drug-related adverse effects occurred during treatment. Vital signs remained stable, and laboratory test results remained within normal limits. The results indicate that lorazepam was as effective as chlordiazepoxide in reducing the symptoms of acute alcohol withdrawal. Because of its simpler and more predictable metabolic pathway and its insignificant accumulation in plasma during multiple-dose therapy, lorazepam may be the drug of choice if benzodiazepine therapy is required for chronic alcoholics with acute withdrawal symptoms. This pilot study evaluates the safety and efficacy of divalproex sodium (Depakote) for alcohol withdrawal and relapse prevention. Sixteen patients in moderate alcohol withdrawal were randomized to receive a standard benzodiazepine detoxification, depakote detoxification, or depakote detox plus maintenance. Symptom reduction occurred more rapidly and consistently in the depakote treated patients than in the benzodiazepine control group, and at six-week follow up a greater percentage of patients in the depakote maintenance group were completely abstinent than either detox-only group. There were no significant differences in sociodemographic or drinking data amongst the three cohort samples at baseline. Our findings suggest that the anticonvulsant divalproex sodium (Depakote) may be a safe and efficacious alternative to benzodiazepines for the treatment of alcohol withdrawal. It may be an advantageous alternative for outpatient detoxification, as it has no abuse potential, pharmacologic synergy with alcohol, or substantial cognitive or psychomotor side effects. Treatment of the alcohol withdrawal syndrome is best accomplished using pharmacologic agents that have minimal interaction with alcohol, have limited adverse effects, and are without abuse potential. The partial benzodiazepine receptor agonist beta-carboline compound, abecarnil, has been shown in animal and human studies to possess a number of these characteristics and to be useful in the reduction of alcohol withdrawal convulsions in mice. In this study, 49 alcohol-dependent inpatients who exhibited at least moderate symptoms of uncomplicated alcohol withdrawal were treated over a 5-day detoxification period with abecarnil or diazepam and rated daily for alcohol withdrawal symptoms and adverse events. Both the abecarnil and diazepam treatment groups exhibited a similar marked reduction in withdrawal symptoms over time. In addition, similar rates of successful treatment and improvement were observed after 1 day of treatment and at termination in alcoholics treated with either medication. Overall, rates of adverse events and changes in liver enzymes were similar in both treatment groups and were generally benign. Because of the unique pharmacologic profile of abecarnil in animal and in non-clinical human studies, including anticonvulsant action, low abuse liability, and a favorable side effect profile, further study of compounds of the partial benzodiazepine receptor agonist type in the treatment of alcohol withdrawal syndromes seems warranted. Of 86 alcoholic men with severe alcohol withdrawal who began a double-blind controlled study comparing carbamazepine, 800 mg/day, to oxazepam, 120 mg/day, 66 (carbamazepine, N = 32; oxazepam, N = 34) completed the 7-day trial. In general, the drugs were found to be equally efficacious in treating the withdrawal syndrome and not significantly different with respect to side effects. The subjects taking oxazepam had an increase in global psychological distress from day 3 to day 7, and those taking carbamazepine exhibited a decline. The study suggests that carbamazepine is as effective and safe as benzodiazepine treatment for alcohol withdrawal. Benzodiazepine use by elderly patients is associated with adverse outcomes including increased risk of falls and fractures, motor vehicle accidents and cognitive impairment. Recent studies suggest that individualized feedback and education to physicians may improve drug prescribing. In this study, we evaluated an intervention to address the inappropriate prescribing of benzodiazepines for elderly patients.
                We identified 1624 primary care physicians who wrote at least 10 prescriptions for the target drugs in a 2-month period and randomly assigned these physicians to the intervention group or the control group. We obtained data from the Ontario Drug Benefit claims database, which covers all Ontario residents aged 65 years and over for drugs selected from a minimally restrictive formulary. Every 2 months for 6 months, confidential profiles of benzodiazepine prescription use coupled with evidence-based educational bulletins were mailed to the intervention group. The control group received feedback and educational bulletins about first-line antihypertension drug prescribing for elderly patients. Our main outcome measures were reductions in the proportion of each physician's total benzodiazepine prescriptions for long-acting agents, combinations of benzodiazepines with other psychoactive medications (including other benzodiazepines) and long-term benzodiazepine therapy.
                After randomization, 168 physicians agreed to be in the intervention group and 206 in the control group. Their demographic and prescribing characteristics were similar. Although the proportion of long-acting benzodiazepine prescriptions decreased by 0.7% in the intervention group between the baseline period and the end of the intervention period (from 20.3%, or a mean of 29.5 prescriptions, to 19.6%, or a mean of 27.7 prescriptions) and increased by 1.1% in the control group (from 19.8%, or a mean of 26.4 prescriptions, to 20.9%, or a mean of 27.7 prescriptions) (p = 0.036), this difference was not clinically significant. There was no significant difference over the study period in either combination prescribing of benzodiazepines or in prescriptions for long-term benzodiazepine therapy.
                We did not find that a program of confidential feedback and educational material offered to Ontario primary care physicians had a clinically significant impact on their benzodiazepine prescribing. Prevention of recurrent alcohol withdrawal seizures is a common emergency department problem. A prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study of adequate size was designed to assess the efficacy of phenytoin in preventing recurrence of alcohol withdrawal seizures.
                Fifty-five patients who had seized from alcohol withdrawal were randomly assigned to treatment with IV phenytoin or placebo. Patients with known seizure disorders and those receiving any anticonvulsant were excluded. The study was terminated after seizure recurrence or passage of a six-hour, high-risk seizure interval.
                Six of 28 phenytoin-treated patients (21%) had recurrent seizures compared with five of 27 placebo-treated patients (19%). The 95% confidence interval for the difference in response probabilities was +16% to -20%. There was no statistically significant difference between the response rates for the two treatments (P greater than .05).
                Phenytoin does not show significant benefit over placebo in preventing recurrence of alcohol withdrawal seizures. Forty patients with primary chronic alcoholism took part in a randomized, double-blind, comparative group study of clobazam and chlordiazepoxide in the treatment of acute alcohol withdrawal. Assessments were carried out during an initial in-patient week followed by a week of out-patient assessments. Both benzodiazepines were shown to be highly effective when compared with baseline measurements. However, the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale showed clobazam to be more effective than chlordiazepoxide at both 7 days (p = 0.03) and 14 days (p less than 0.05). The clobazam group showed significant improvements compared with baseline for all four factors of the Leeds Sleep Evaluation Questionnaire, whereas the chlordiazepoxide group showed a significant improvement in only one factor. At the end of the in-patient week, clobazam showed a significant improvement (p less than 0.01) compared to chlordiazepoxide for the Linear Analogue Rating Scale of anxiety/tension. The 1,5 benzodiazepine clobazam has been shown to be a valuable addition to currently available regimens when used alone in the treatment of acute alcohol withdrawal, especially during the initial period where anxiety and insomnia related symptoms are at their peak. The efficacy and safety of lamotrigine and carbamazepine as monotherapy in patients with untreated, newly diagnosed or recurrent partial and/or generalised tonic-clonic seizures, were compared in a randomised, open, multicentre study. Patients received 24 weeks' treatment with oral lamotrigine 100 mg (LTG 100, n = 115) or 200 mg (LTG 200, n = 111) or carbamazepine 600 mg (CBZ 600, n = 117). Efficacy measurements were comparable between the three treatment groups, although the higher lamotrigine dose was possibly most effective, with 60.4% completing seizure free compared with 51.3% (LTG 100) and 54.7% (CBZ 600). Both dosage regimens of lamotrigine were well tolerated. More patients on CBZ 600 reported adverse experiences, 66% versus 53% (LTG 100) and 58% (LTG 200), and of these a greater proportion were attributed to CBZ 600 treatment, 53% versus 23% (LTG 100) and 28% (LTG 200). Similarly, a greater proportion of the CBZ 600 group required a change in dose, 47% versus 20% (LTG 100) and 17% (LTG 200) or withdrew completely due to adverse experiences, 10.3% versus 4.3% (LTG 100) and 4.5% (LTG 200). The most common adverse experience leading to withdrawal was rash, with approximately double the proportion of reports occurring in patients on CBZ 600 (5.1%) compared with lamotrigine (1.7% on LTG 100 and 2.7% on LTG 200). Overall lamotrigine appeared equally effective but better tolerated compared with carbamazepine. Multiple lines of evidence suggest both dopaminergic and serotonergic involvement in the reinforcing effects of cocaine. Medications such as olanzapine, which block dopamine D2 receptors, as well as serotonin receptors 5HT2A and 5HT2C may be able to reduce cocaine use in cocaine dependent patients by reducing the euphoric effects of cocaine and attenuating cocaine craving.
                This was a 12-week, double blind, placebo controlled, pilot trial involving 30 cocaine dependent subjects. Subjects received either olanzapine (10 mg/day) or identical placebo. Outcome measures included treatment retention, qualitative urine benzoylecgonine tests, cocaine craving, clinical global impression scores, and results from the addiction severity index.
                Treatment retention was slightly, but significantly, better in the placebo-treated subjects. Placebo-treated subjects were more likely to be abstinent from cocaine during the trial compared to olanzapine-treated subjects, based on urine benzoylecgonine results. Olanzapine was not superior to placebo in any outcome measure.
                The results of this trial do not support the usefulness of olanzapine for the treatment of cocaine dependence. In fact, olanzapine may worsen cocaine treatment outcome. Vigabatrin is a newly licensed drug for use in patients with epilepsy. We investigated whether this drug was comparable to standard first-line monotherapy in efficacy and incidence of adverse events.
                We enrolled 459 patients with newly diagnosed, previously untreated partial epileptic seizures from 44 European centres and randomly assigned them carbamazepine 600 mg daily (n=230) or vigabatrin 2 g daily (n=229). After initial maintenance doses were reached, doses were adjusted downwards (in the case of adverse events) or upwards (in the case of seizures) by the clinician. The primary outcome was time to withdrawal because of lack of efficacy or adverse events. Secondary outcomes included efficacy (time to 6-month remission of seizures, time to first seizure after initial dose stabilisation), and adverse events (incidence and severity). Analysis was by intention to treat.
                Time to withdrawal for lack of efficacy or adverse events did not differ between groups (p=0.318). Vigabatrin was better tolerated than carbamazepine with fewer withdrawals, but was more frequently associated with psychiatric symptoms (58 [25%] vs 34 [15%]) and weight gain (25 [11%] vs 12 [5%]). Carbamazepine was associated with rash (22 [10%] vs seven [3%]). All efficacy outcomes favoured carbamazepine and failed to show equivalence between the two drugs. No significant difference was found for time to achieve 6 months of remission from seizures (p=0.058), but the most powerful outcome, time to first seizure after the first 6 weeks from randomisation, showed carbamazepine to be significantly more effective than vigabatrin (p=0.0001).
                Vigabatrin seems less effective but better tolerated than carbamazepine, which is the first-choice drug for the treatment of partial epilepsies. Vigabatrin cannot therefore be recommended as a first-line drug for monotherapy in this group of patients. Lamotrigine has been licensed widely as adjunctive therapy for partial and secondary generalised seizures. Use of the drug as monotherapy was investigated in a double-blind, randomised, parallel-group comparison with carbamazepine in newly diagnosed epilepsy. After 4 weeks of planned, fixed dose escalation, doses were adjusted according to efficacy, adverse events, and plasma concentrations. 151 of 260 patients (131 lamotrigine, 129 carbamazepine) in eight UK centres completed the 48-week trial. No differences in efficacy between the drugs were found for partial seizures with or without secondary generalisation or for primary generalised tonic-clonic seizures. The proportion of patients maintained seizure-free during the last 24 weeks of treatment was almost the same in both groups (39% lamotrigine, 38% carbamazepine). More patients with primary generalised tonic-clonic seizures (47% both groups) than those presenting with a focal onset (35%, 37%) were fully controlled. Overall, fewer patients on lamotrigine than on carbamazepine withdrew because of adverse events (15 vs 27%). The commonest side-effect leading to withdrawal with either drug was rash (9%, 13%). Sleepiness was less common in lamotrigine than in carbamazepine recipients (12 vs 22%, p < 0.05). More lamotrigine than carbamazepine recipients (65 vs 51%, p = 0.018) completed the study (hazard ratio 1.57 [95% CI 1.07-2.31]). Lamotrigine and carbamazepine showed similar efficacy against partial onset seizures and primary generalised tonic-clonic seizures in newly diagnosed epilepsy. Lamotrigine, however, was better tolerated. The effect of low-dose haloperidol combined with the anticonvulsant carbamazepine was investigated in a 5-week placebo-controlled, double-blind study in acute schizophrenic patients. Weekly ratings showed a clinically pronounced and statistically significant improvement in both the carbamazepine and placebo groups. However, the patients on carbamazepine needed less neuroleptic and anticholinergic medication and experienced fewer side effects compared to the patients on placebo. Moreover, patients in the carbamazepine group showed a clear deterioration after discontinuation of carbamazepine (but maintenance of neuroleptic medication), while the placebo group did not change after discontinuation of placebo. Concomitant treatment with carbamazepine in psychotic patients may help to reduce neuroleptic dosages and unwanted side effects. Clobazam was compared with placebo as antiepileptic adjunct medication in 129 therapy-resistant epileptic patients who were mainly suffering from complex partial seizures. The study was performed in five European countries according to a double-blind crossover design lasting 7 months. Two treatment periods of 3 months (1 month adjustment and 2 months maintenance medication) were separated by one medication switch-over month. The difference in seizure reduction between clobazam and placebo was significant (p less than 0.05). Nineteen percent of patients receiving clobazam became seizure-free during the maintenance dose period. In contrast, freedom from seizures was not observed in any placebo patient. Electroencephalogram (EEG) signs, mood ratings, and global impressions also indicated therapeutic effects of clobazam in epilepsy. The most frequent adverse reactions to clobazam were drowsiness and dizziness. However, the sedative effects of clobazam seemed to be less pronounced in comparison with other benzodiazepines. The study gives evidence of the therapeutic value of clobazam as adjunct medication in therapy-resistant partial seizures. The use of clobazam as monotherapy and long-term treatment, as well as the particular seizure response pattern to clobazam, has to be further investigated. A double-blind, randomized trial is described which was designed to compare the clinical effect of 600 mg daily of carbamazepine (Tegretol) and of tiapride (Sereprile) in hospitalized patients with pre-delirium tremens. Physicians' assessment of patients' progress was made following 2, 4 and 7 days of treatment. Of the sixty patients admitted to the study, five dropped out for various reasons, leaving fifty-five patients who completed the study. Both drugs were effective in the treatment of alcohol withdrawal symptoms; no significant difference was found between the two treatments with respect to total symptoms, score and visual analogue scale assessment. Carbamazepine gave faster relief of symptoms and demonstrated a preferential action on symptoms like fear and hallucinations. No case of delirium tremens was observed in those patients who completed the trial. Benzodiazepines are the mainstay of treatment for mild-to-moderate alcohol withdrawal in outpatient settings, but they can interact with alcohol, cause motor incoordination, or be abused. This study compared the therapeutic responses of the benzodiazepine lorazepam and the anticonvulsant carbamazepine for the outpatient treatment of acute alcohol withdrawal in terms of patients' previous detoxification histories, and compared the effects of these 2 medications on drinking behaviors in the immediate postdetoxification period.
                This was a randomized double-blind trial comparing patient responses to carbamazepine and lorazepam across 2 levels of detoxification histories (0-1 or >or=2 previous medicated detoxifications).
                A university medical center substance abuse clinic in Charleston, SC.
                One hundred thirty-six patients in moderate alcohol withdrawal were randomized. Major exclusions were significant hepatic or hematologic abnormalities and use of medications that could alter withdrawal symptoms.
                Patients received 600-800 mg of carbamazepine or 6-8 mg of lorazepam in divided doses on day 1 tapering to 200 mg of carbamazepine or 2 mg of lorazepam.
                The Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment for Alcohol-Revised was used to assess alcohol withdrawal symptoms on days 1 through 5 and postmedication at days 7 and 12. Daily drinking was measured by patient report using a daily drinking log and a breath alcohol level with each visit. Side effects were recorded daily.
                Carbamazepine and lorazepam were equally effective at decreasing the symptoms of alcohol withdrawal. In the post-treatment period, 89 patients drank on at least 1 day; on average, carbamazepine patients drank less than 1 drink per drinking day and lorazepam patients drank almost 3 drinks per drinking day (P =.003). Among those with multiple past detoxifications, the carbamazepine group drank less than 1 drink per day on average and the lorazepam group drank about 5 drinks per day on average (P =.033). Lorazepam-treated patients had a significant rebound of alcohol withdrawal symptoms post-treatment (P =.007) and the risk of having a first drink was 3 times greater (P =.04) than for carbamazepine-treated patients. Twenty percent of lorazepam-treated patients had dizziness, motor incoordination, or ataxia and did not recognize their impairment. Twenty percent of carbamazepine-treated patients reported pruritus but no rash.
                Carbamazepine and lorazepam were both effective in decreasing the symptoms of alcohol withdrawal in relatively healthy, middle-aged outpatients. Carbamazepine, however, was superior to lorazepam in preventing rebound withdrawal symptoms and reducing post-treatment drinking, especially for those with a history of multiple treated withdrawals. The efficacy and safety of a new triazolobenzodiazepine, alprazolam, was compared to diazepam in 46 alcoholics in a double-blind study. The drugs were administered for 21 days starting on the fifth day after the last drink. The mean optimal daily oral dose of alprazolam was 2.2 mg and of diazepam 20.2 mg given in a t.i.d. fashion. Alprazolam was as effective as diazepam in the relief of anxiety as measured by the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, Physician's Global Impressions, Patient's Global Impressions, Hopkins Symptom Checklist and Target Symptoms Record. At the end of the trial 95% of patients in both groups experienced moderate to marked therapeutic effect and felt much or very much better as compared to the start of the study. The number of side effects was similar in both groups and they were mostly described by patients as "mild". A few case reports and data from animal experiments point to a possible efficacy of gabapentin (GP) in the treatment of alcohol withdrawal syndrome (AWS). Because of ethical considerations, the efficacy of GP in acute AWS was tested in an add-on fashion to clomethiazole (CLO). Given that the symptom-triggered amount of CLO required to limit AWS within the first 24 hours is related to the severity of AWS, we tested this amount of CLO during placebo (P) or GP (400 mg qid) under double blind, randomized conditions. Sixty-one patients (P = 29/GP = 32) suffering from alcohol dependence (ICD-10) and without any other psychiatric condition or psychotropic medication were included. The groups were not significantly different in baseline characteristics (eg, demographic data, severity of AWS). Both ITT and completer analyses revealed no significant differences between the groups considering the primary effectiveness measure: amount of CLO required in the first 24 hours (P = 6.1 +/- 5.4/GP = 6.2 +/- 4.7 capsules). In addition, premature discontinuations (P = 3/GP = 2) and decreases in Mainz Alcohol Withdrawal Scores were not significantly different in the first 48 hours of AWS (secondary effectiveness measures). Tolerability of combined CLO/GP was studied throughout the whole treatment comprising a 5-day lasting reduction part subsequent to the first 48 hours. Throughout the whole 7-day treatment a total of 5 and 2 patients dropped out and 6 and 5 patients reported adverse clinical events in the P and GP groups, respectively. All together, GP (400 mg qid) was no better than P in saving initial consumption of CLO or decreasing initial Mainz Alcohol Withdrawal Scores suggesting that GP was ineffective in the management of acute AWS in this model. The combination of GP and CLO was safe. Benztropine mesylate (intravenous [IV] and oral) challenge was compared with brief neuroleptic withdrawal on dyskinesia ratings and symptom measures. Thirty-six neuroleptic-treated patients underwent a placebo-controlled acute IV challenge with 2 mg benztropine and a placebo-controlled two-week trial of oral benztropine mesylate (2 mg three times a day), followed by a double-blind placebo-controlled neuroleptic withdrawal involving four weeks of dose tapering and six weeks of placebo treatment. Benztropine given IV had no significant effect. Orally administered benztropine, however, led to statistically significant increases in dyskinesia and dysphoric mood. The brief neuroleptic withdrawal significantly increased dyskinesia scores and dysphoria and resulted in early termination of therapy in 12 of 36 patients (33%) due to symptom exacerbation. There was a striking absence of correlation between dyskinesia change measures brought about by benztropine and changes following neuroleptic withdrawal. Therefore anticholinergic challenge does not appear to be a fruitful procedure for identifying patients with covert dyskinesia. Seventy-two hospitalized patients with alcohol withdrawal symptoms were treated with either carbamazepine (Tegretol) or barbital ( Diemal ) in a randomized, double-blind trial. The dose of trial medication as well as the duration of treatment was individual, corresponding to the conventional treatment schedule. During the trial period daily records were kept of target withdrawal symptoms, global evaluation, the patient's subjective feeling and unwanted effects. Sixty patients completed the treatment successfully. The two treatment groups were homogeneous as regards patient characteristics, pre-treatment disease severity and drop-out rate. No statistically significant differences were found in efficacy between the two treatments, and both drugs were well tolerated. It is concluded that carbamazepine is a valuable alternative drug in the treatment of mild and moderate alcohol withdrawal symptoms. The efficacy of chlordiazepoxide and tiapride in the management of acute alcohol withdrawal syndrome was compared in a randomized, parallel-group, double-blind trial. The mean daily dose for both preparations on the first two days was four capsules, i.e., 200 mg for chlordiazepoxide and 400 mg for tiapride. Thereafter the patients were treated according to the relief of symptoms obtained. The treatment periods lasted 3-5 days. Both drugs effectively alleviated alcohol withdrawal symptoms, especially anxiety, fear, hallucinations, insomnia, sweating, tremor, abdominal pain and vertigo. Seventy percent of the patients in the chlordiazepoxide and 42% in the tiapride group considered the drug effective. The difference was statistically significant in favour of chlordiazepoxide (p less than 0.05). Tiapride is an alternative drug in the treatment of this condition, if benzodiazepines are to be avoided. Thirty-seven male alcoholics admitted electively for detoxification were randomized to treatment with either diazepam or propranolol. Subjects were comparable both in age and in duration and quantity of alcohol consumed. Admission laboratory parameters did not distinguish between the groups. Eleven subjects required no medication to control withdrawal signs/symptoms. Both groups showed improvement in blood pressure, pulse, and withdrawal tremor. None of the subjects randomized to diazepam manifested withdrawal seizures or hallucinations. By contrast, one subject in the propranolol group had a single withdrawal seizure. Another subject manifested increasing withdrawal that required parenteral paraldehyde treatment. Thus, this study confirms that a significant number of subjects admitted electively for alcohol withdrawal can be managed without medication. Minor tranquilizers still remain the "gold standard" for management of the withdrawal syndrome. Forty four subjects were treated for benzodiazepine dependence. The withdrawal programme lasted for 10 weeks and included regular group support sessions. Patients were also treated with either propranolol, placebo or "no pill" under double blind conditions. Twenty three patients complied with the full treatment regimen and completed the trial. The outcome of treatment was moderately successful, with 8 out of the 23 patients stopping their tranquilizers and a further 11 achieving a reduction of 50% or more of their original benzodiazepine dose. Tranquilizer dependence is a difficult condition to treat, but preliminary results suggest that propranolol is helpful in reducing the symptoms of benzodiazepine withdrawal. To study the efficacy and safety of eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) as adjunctive therapy for refractory partial seizures in adults with >or=4 partial-onset seizures (simple or complex, with or without secondary generalization) per 4 weeks despite treatment with 1-2 antiepileptic drugs (AEDs).
                This multicenter, parallel-group study had an 8-week, single-blind, placebo baseline phase, after which patients were randomized to placebo (n = 102) or once-daily ESL 400 mg (n = 100), 800 mg (n = 98), or 1,200 mg (n = 102) in the double-blind treatment phase. ESL starting dose was 400 mg; thereafter, ESL was titrated at weekly 400-mg steps to the full maintenance dose (12 weeks).
                Seizure frequency adjusted per 4 weeks over the maintenance period (primary endpoint) was significantly lower than placebo in the ESL 1,200-mg (p = 0.0003) and 800-mg (p = 0.0028) groups [analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) of log-transformed seizure frequency]. Responder rate was 20% (placebo), 23% (400 mg), 34% (800 mg), and 43% (1,200 mg). Median relative reduction in seizure frequency was 16% (placebo), 26% (400 mg), 36% (800 mg), and 45% (1,200 mg). The most frequent concomitant AEDs were carbamazepine (56-62% of patients), lamotrigine (25-27%), and valproic acid (22-28%). Similar efficacy results were obtained in patients administered ESL with or without carbamazepine as concomitant AED. Discontinuation rates caused by adverse events (AEs) were 3.9% (placebo), 4% (400 mg), 8.2% (800 mg), and 19.6% (1,200 mg). AEs in >10% of any group were dizziness, headache, and diplopia. Most AEs were mild or moderate.
                ESL, 800 and 1,200 mg once-daily, was well tolerated and more effective than placebo in patients who were refractory to treatment with one or two concomitant AEDs. The antiepileptic effect of lamotrigine (LTG) was assessed in a double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial in 24 adult patients with refractory partial seizures. LTG or placebo was added to existing antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). The dose of LTG varied from 75 to 400 mg daily. Three patients did not complete the trial. One was withdrawn from the trial with ataxia, tiredness, dyspnea, and diplopia while receiving LTG and died 18 days later of invasive carcinoma involving the liver. A second patient was withdrawn during baseline for contravening admission criteria, and a third received LTG in error during both treatment periods. Twenty-one patients (12 men and 9 women) completed the trial. An analysis of seizure counts in the 12-week treatment period with LTG showed a statistically significant reduction in seizures as compared with placebo for total seizures (p less than 0.002), partial seizures (p less than 0.002), and secondarily generalized seizures (p less than 0.05). The analysis of total seizure days showed a significant reduction during LTG treatment (p less than 0.002). There were no statistically significant changes in plasma concentrations of phenytoin (PHT), carbamazepine (CBZ), primidone (PRM), or phenobarbital (PB) between the two treatment periods. The most common adverse events reported during the trial were diplopia, drowsiness, tiredness, ataxia, and headache, but although these were more frequent during LTG treatment, the differences from placebo were not statistically significant. No hematological or biochemical changes were noted. Few long-term studies have compared the efficacy and safety of typical and atypical antipsychotic medications directly in patients with a first episode of psychosis who met the criteria for schizophrenia or a related psychotic disorder. This study compared the acute and long-term effectiveness of haloperidol with that of olanzapine in patients with first-episode psychosis in a large, controlled clinical trial.
                Patients with first-episode psychosis (N=263) were randomly assigned under double-blind conditions to receive haloperidol or olanzapine and were followed for up to 104 weeks. Domains measured included psychopathology, psychosocial variables, neurocognitive functioning, and brain morphology and metabolism. This report presents data from clinical measures of treatment response and safety data from the 12-week acute treatment phase.
                Haloperidol and olanzapine were associated with substantial and comparable baseline-to-endpoint reductions in symptom severity, which did not differ significantly in last-observation-carried-forward analyses. However, in a mixed-model analysis, olanzapine-treated subjects had significantly greater decreases in symptom severity as measured by the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total score and negative and general scales and by the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale but not as measured by the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale positive scale and by the Clinical Global Impression severity rating. Olanzapine-treated patients experienced a lower rate of treatment-emergent parkinsonism and akathisia but had significantly more weight gain, compared with the haloperidol-treated patients. Overall, significantly more olanzapine-treated subjects than haloperidol-treated subjects completed the 12-week acute phase of the study (67% versus 54%).
                As expected on the basis of previous studies, both olanzapine and haloperidol were effective in the acute reduction of psychopathological symptoms in this group of patients with first-episode psychosis. However, olanzapine had several relative advantages in therapeutic response. Although the nature of adverse events differed between the two agents, retention in the study was greater with olanzapine. Retention in treatment is important in this patient population, given their risk of relapse. Longer-term results are needed to determine whether treatment with atypical antipsychotics results in superior outcomes for a first episode of schizophrenia. Propranolol alone was more effective than either chlordiazepoxide or a combination of chlordiazepoxide and propranolol in alleviating the symptoms of the alcohol withdrawal syndrome. Although psychoactive medications have substantial side effects in the elderly, these drugs are used frequently in nursing homes. Few interventions have succeeded in changing this situation, and little is known about the clinical effects of such interventions.
                We studied six matched pairs of nursing homes; at one randomly selected nursing home in each pair, physicians, nurses, and aides participated in an educational program in geriatric psychopharmacology. At base line we determined the type and quantity of drugs received by all residents (n = 823), and a blinded observer performed standardized clinical assessments of the residents who were taking psychoactive medications. After the five-month program, drug use and patient status were reassessed.
                Scores on an index of psychoactive-drug use, measuring both the magnitude and the probable inappropriateness of medication use, declined significantly more in the nursing homes in which the program was carried out (experimental nursing homes) than in the control nursing homes (decrease, 27 percent vs. 8 percent; P = 0.02). The use of antipsychotic drugs was discontinued in more residents in the experimental nursing homes than in the control nursing homes (32 percent vs. 14 percent); the comparable figures for the discontinuation of long-acting benzodiazepines were 20 percent vs. 9 percent, and for antihistamine hypnotics, 45 percent vs. 21 percent. In the experimental nursing homes residents who were initially taking antipsychotic drugs showed less deterioration on several measures of cognitive function than similar residents in the control facilities, but they were more likely to report depression. Those who were initially taking benzodiazepines or antihistamine hypnotic agents reported less anxiety than controls but had more loss of memory. Most other measures of clinical status remained unchanged in both groups.
                An educational program targeted to physicians, nurses, and aides can reduce the use of psychoactive drugs in nursing homes without adversely affecting the overall behavior and level of functioning of the residents. For important reasons, lorazepam (Ativan) and chlordiazepoxide (Librium) are both popular treatments for alcohol-withdrawal syndrome. Nevertheless, there is little literature directly comparing the two drugs. A formal comparison is desirable because of pharmacokinetic and other differences that could affect safety and efficacy considerations relevant to practice in developing countries.
                One hundred consecutive consenting male inpatients in a state of moderately severe, uncomplicated alcohol withdrawal at screening were randomized to receive either lorazepam (8 mg/day) or chlordiazepoxide (80 mg/day) with dosing down-titrated to zero in a fixed-dose schedule across 8 treatment days. Double-blind assessments of withdrawal-symptom severity and impairing adverse events were obtained during treatment and for 4 days afterward.
                One chlordiazepoxide patient developed withdrawal delirium. Lorazepam and chlordiazepoxide showed similar efficacy in reducing symptoms of alcohol withdrawal as assessed using the revised Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment for Alcohol scale. During withdrawal, irritability and dizziness were more common with lorazepam, and palpitations were more common with chlordiazepoxide. No difficulties in drug discontinuation or differences in impairing adverse events were observed with either drug.
                With the treatment schedule used in this study, lorazepam is as effective as the more traditional drug chlordiazepoxide in attenuating uncomplicated alcohol withdrawal. Lorazepam, therefore, could be used with confidence when liver disease or the inability to determine liver function status renders chlordiazepoxide therapy problematic. The absence of clinically significant withdrawal complications with lorazepam in this large study contrasts with findings from previously published studies and suggests that higher doses of lorazepam than those formerly used may be necessary during alcohol withdrawal. To investigate the efficacy and safety of once-daily eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) when used as add-on treatment in adults with > or = 4 partial-onset seizures per 4-week despite treatment with 1 to 3 antiepileptic drugs (AEDs).
                This double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter study consisted of an 8-week observational baseline period, after which patients were randomized to placebo (n=100) or once-daily ESL 400 mg (n=96), 800 mg (n=101), or 1200 mg (n=98). Patients then entered a 14-week double-blind treatment phase. All patients started on their full maintenance dose except for those in the ESL 1200 mg group who received once-daily ESL 800 mg for 2 weeks before reaching their full maintenance dose.
                Seizure frequency per 4-week (primary endpoint) over the 14-week double-blind treatment period was significantly lower than placebo in the ESL 800 mg and 1200 mg (p<0.001) groups. Responder rate (> or = 50% reduction in seizure frequency) was 13.0% (placebo), 16.7% (400 mg), 40.0% (800 mg, p<0.001), and 37.1% (1200 mg, p<0.001). Median relative reduction in seizure frequency was 0.8% (placebo), 18.7% (400 mg), 32.6% (800 mg, p<0.001), and 32.8% (1200 mg). Discontinuation rates due to adverse events (AEs) were 3.0% (placebo), 12.5% (400 mg), 18.8% (800 mg), and 26.5% (1200 mg). The most common (>5%) AEs in any group were dizziness, somnolence, headache, nausea, diplopia, abnormal coordination, vomiting, blurred vision, and fatigue. The majority of AEs were of mild or moderate severity.
                Treatment with once-daily eslicarbazepine acetate 800 mg and 1200 mg was more effective than placebo and generally well tolerated in patients with partial-onset seizures refractory to treatment with 1 to 3 concomitant AEDs.
                Copyright 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) as adjunctive therapy in adults with partial-onset seizures.
                Double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter study consisting of an 8-week baseline period, after which patients were randomized to placebo (n = 87) or once-daily ESL 800 mg (n = 85) or 1200 mg (n = 80). Patients received half dose during 2 weeks preceding a 12-week maintenance period.
                Seizure frequency over the maintenance period was significantly (P < 0.05) lower than placebo in both ESL groups. Responder rate was 23% (placebo), 35% (800 mg), and 38% (1200 mg). Median relative reduction in seizure frequency was 17% (placebo), 38% (800 mg), and 42% (1200 mg). The most common adverse events (AEs) (>10%) were dizziness, somnolence, headache, and nausea. The majority of AEs were of mild or moderate severity.
                Once-daily treatment with ESL 800 and 1200 mg was effective and generally well tolerated. In order to measure the effect of industry-independent information on the prescribing of benzodiazepines in general practice, 128 primary practitioners were randomly allocated to three intervention groups after stratification by year of graduation. One third of the participating physicians were forwarded written information about the indications and limitations of benzodiazepines, another third received both written and oral information, and the remaining third (the control group) obtained no information at all. A comparison of the number of benzodiazepines prescribed per 100 patient contacts with prescription before and after the intervention showed an average decrease of 3% in the control group, of 14% in physicians who received only written information, and of 24% in physicians who were given additional oral information. Post hoc pair-wise comparisons revealed a significant difference at the 1% level in the number of benzodiazepines prescribed between physicians who received both written and oral information and the control group. A follow-up survey conducted 4 weeks after the intervention showed that the oral information campaign positively affected physicians' attitudes about the value of oral drug information from an industry-independent source. The efficacy and safety of topiramate 400 mg/day as adjunctive therapy to traditional antieleptic drugs for partial onset seizures with or without secondary generalization were assessed in a double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial. Forty-seven patients with at least one seizure per week during an 8 week baseline were randomly assigned to topiramate (N = 23) or placebo (N = 24) double-blind treatment for a 3 week titration and an 8 week stabilization period. Median percent reduction from baseline in monthly seizure frequency during the double-blind phase was not significantly greater in the topiramate group than in the placebo group (41% vs. 1%; P = 0.065). Nevertheless, other efficacy variables evidenced statistically significant differences in favor of topiramate: a greater number of treatment responders (> or = 50% reduction in seizures; 35% vs. 8%; P = 0.033); better investigator (P = 0.002) and patient (P = 0.021) global assessments; and greater reductions in secondarily generalized seizures compared to placebo (P = 0.002). The most commonly reported topiramate treatment-emergent adverse events were somnolence, fatigue, abnormal vision, weight decrease, and anxiety. Most adverse events were mild or moderate in severity. Among 7 withdrawals due to limiting adverse events, 6 were CNS-related (in 5 topiramate-treated patients). Results of this trial strongly suggest that topiramate 400 mg/day is effective and well tolerated in the treatment of refractory partial epilepsy. In accordance with a previous study of adjuvant effects of the anticonvulsant carbamazepine (CBZ) on the neuroleptic treatment of schizophrenic psychoses, the effects of valproate (VPA) were tested in a randomly assigned double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Apart from a (statistically nonsignificant) psychopathological deterioration following discontinuation of VPA while on continuous neuroleptic mediation after four weeks and a statistically significant effect on "hostile belligerence", no overall therapeutic effects of the combination of haloperidol (HPD) with VPA were observed under controlled conditions. Unlike the results with CBZ, concomitant use of VPA led to an even higher consumption of haloperidol and biperiden and to a higher rate of extrapyramidal symptoms compared with the corresponding placebo group, although these differences did not attain statistical significance. In regard to use of the sedative neuroleptic chlorprothixene, there was a trend toward lower doses in the VPA group than in the placebo group. From these results, adjuvant effects like those of carbamazepine in the neuroleptic treatment of schizophrenic psychoses could not be confirmed for valproate in the present study. However, the trend toward lower doses of sedative medication and observed effects on "hostile belligerence" may indicate sedative and/or antimanic properties of valproate which have recently been demonstrated in several controlled studies. To explore the efficacy and safety of eslicarbazepine acetate (BIA 2-093), a new antiepileptic drug, as adjunctive therapy in adult patients with partial epilepsy.
                A multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study was conducted in 143 refractory patients aged 18-65 years with >or=4 partial-onset seizures/month. The study consisted of a 12-week treatment period followed by a 1-week tapering off. Patients were randomly assigned to one of three groups: treatment with eslicarbazepine acetate once daily (QD, n=50), twice daily (BID, n=46), or placebo (PL, n=47). The daily dose was titrated from 400 mg to 800 mg and to 1,200 mg at 4-week intervals. The proportion of responders (patients with a >or=50% seizure reduction) was the primary end point.
                The percentage of responders versus baseline showed a statistically significant difference between QD and PL groups (54% vs. 28%; 90% CI =-infinity, -14; p=0.008). The difference between the BID (41%) and PL did not reach statistical significance (90% CI =-infinity, -1; p=0.12). A significantly higher proportion of responders in weeks 5-8 was found in the QD group than in the BID group (58% vs. 33%, respectively, p=0.022). At the end of the 12-week treatment, the number of seizure-free patients in the QD and BID groups was 24%, which was significantly different from the PL group. The incidence of adverse events was similar between the treatment groups and no drug-related serious adverse events occurred.
                Eslicarbazepine acetate was efficacious and well tolerated as an adjunctive therapy of refractory epileptic patients.
Benzodiazepines showed a protective benefit against alcohol withdrawal symptoms, in particular seizures, when compared to placebo and a potentially protective benefit for many outcomes when compared with other drugs. Nevertheless, no definite conclusions about the effectiveness and safety of benzodiazepines was possible, because of the heterogeneity of the trials both in interventions and the assessment of outcomes.