Cognitive effects of individual anticholinergic drugs: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1590/1980-5764-DN-2022-0053
Amirreza Naseri, Saeed Sadigh-Eteghad, Sepideh Seyedi-Sahebari, Mohammad-Salar Hosseini, Sakineh Hajebrahimi, Hanieh Salehi-Pourmehr
{"title":"Cognitive effects of individual anticholinergic drugs: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Amirreza Naseri,&nbsp;Saeed Sadigh-Eteghad,&nbsp;Sepideh Seyedi-Sahebari,&nbsp;Mohammad-Salar Hosseini,&nbsp;Sakineh Hajebrahimi,&nbsp;Hanieh Salehi-Pourmehr","doi":"10.1590/1980-5764-DN-2022-0053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Anticholinergics (ACs) are among the most prescribed drugs. Investigating the impaired cognitive domains due to individual ACs usage is associated with controversial findings.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of individual ACs on different aspects of cognitive function based on clinical trial studies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA statement. A systematic search was performed in Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed by the Joanna Briggs Institute checklists and the meta-analysis was performed using the CMA software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 3,026 results of searching, 138 studies were included. A total of 38 studies that assess the cognitive impacts of scopolamine were included in the meta-analysis. Included studies reported cognitive effects of scopolamine, mecamylamine, atropine, biperiden, oxybutynin, trihexyphenidyl, benzhexol, and dicyclomine; however, glycopyrrolate, trospium, tolterodine, darifenacin, fesoterodine, tiotropium, and ipratropium were not associated with cognitive decline. Based on the meta-analyses, scopolamine was associated with reduced recognition (SDM -1.84; 95%CI -2.48 to -1.21; p<0.01), immediate recall (SDM -1.82; 95%CI -2.35 to -1.30; p<0.01), matching to sample (SDM -1.76; 95%CI -2.57 to -0.96; p<0.01), delayed recall (SDM -1.54; 95%CI -1.97 to -1.10; p<0.01), complex memory tasks (SDM -1.31; 95%CI -1.78 to -0.84; p<0.01), free recall (SDM -1.18; 95%CI -1.63 to -0.73; p<0.01), cognitive function (SDM -0.95; 95%CI -1.46 to -0.44; p<0.01), attention (SDM -0.85; 95%CI -1.38 to -0.33; p<0.01), and digit span (SDM -0.65; 95%CI -1.21 to -0.10; p=0.02). There was a high RoB in our included study, especially in terms of dealing with possible cofounders.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The limitations of this study suggest a need for more well-designed studies with a longer duration of follow-up on this topic to reach more reliable evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":72777,"journal":{"name":"","volume":"17 ","pages":"e20220053"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10229087/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-5764-DN-2022-0053","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Anticholinergics (ACs) are among the most prescribed drugs. Investigating the impaired cognitive domains due to individual ACs usage is associated with controversial findings.

Objective: The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of individual ACs on different aspects of cognitive function based on clinical trial studies.

Methods: This systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA statement. A systematic search was performed in Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed by the Joanna Briggs Institute checklists and the meta-analysis was performed using the CMA software.

Results: Out of 3,026 results of searching, 138 studies were included. A total of 38 studies that assess the cognitive impacts of scopolamine were included in the meta-analysis. Included studies reported cognitive effects of scopolamine, mecamylamine, atropine, biperiden, oxybutynin, trihexyphenidyl, benzhexol, and dicyclomine; however, glycopyrrolate, trospium, tolterodine, darifenacin, fesoterodine, tiotropium, and ipratropium were not associated with cognitive decline. Based on the meta-analyses, scopolamine was associated with reduced recognition (SDM -1.84; 95%CI -2.48 to -1.21; p<0.01), immediate recall (SDM -1.82; 95%CI -2.35 to -1.30; p<0.01), matching to sample (SDM -1.76; 95%CI -2.57 to -0.96; p<0.01), delayed recall (SDM -1.54; 95%CI -1.97 to -1.10; p<0.01), complex memory tasks (SDM -1.31; 95%CI -1.78 to -0.84; p<0.01), free recall (SDM -1.18; 95%CI -1.63 to -0.73; p<0.01), cognitive function (SDM -0.95; 95%CI -1.46 to -0.44; p<0.01), attention (SDM -0.85; 95%CI -1.38 to -0.33; p<0.01), and digit span (SDM -0.65; 95%CI -1.21 to -0.10; p=0.02). There was a high RoB in our included study, especially in terms of dealing with possible cofounders.

Conclusion: The limitations of this study suggest a need for more well-designed studies with a longer duration of follow-up on this topic to reach more reliable evidence.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
个体抗胆碱能药物的认知作用:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
抗胆碱能药(ACs)是最常用的处方药之一。由于个体使用ac而导致的认知领域受损的调查与有争议的发现有关。目的:本研究的目的是在临床试验研究的基础上,探讨个体ACs对认知功能不同方面的影响。方法:根据PRISMA声明进行系统评价。系统检索Embase、PubMed、Cochrane Library、Scopus和Web of Science数据库。偏倚风险(RoB)采用Joanna Briggs研究所的检查表进行评估,并使用CMA软件进行meta分析。结果:在3026个检索结果中,纳入了138个研究。荟萃分析共纳入了38项评估东莨菪碱对认知影响的研究。纳入的研究报告了东莨菪碱、甲胺、阿托品、双哌啶酮、奥昔布宁、三己苯醚、苯醚醇和二环明的认知作用;然而,甘罗酸酯、曲螺铵、托特罗定、达利那新、非索罗定、噻托溴铵和异丙托溴铵与认知能力下降无关。基于荟萃分析,东莨菪碱与认知能力下降相关(SDM -1.84;95%CI -2.48 ~ -1.21;结论:本研究的局限性提示需要更多设计良好、随访时间较长的研究,以获得更可靠的证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1