4.1 Review

Serotonin reuptake inhibitors and breastfeeding: a systematic review

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/hup.2451

关键词

selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs); selective noradrenergic reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs); serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SRIs); breastfeeding; lactation; review

向作者/读者索取更多资源

ObjectiveThe postnatal period represents a critical phase for mothers because of physiological hormonal changes, the increase of emotional reactions and a greater susceptibility for the onset/recrudescence of psychiatric disorders. Despite the evidence of an increasing utilization of antidepressant drugs during breastfeeding, there is still few reliable information on the neonatal safety of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and selective noradrenergic reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) [serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SRIs)] in nursing mothers. The aim of this study is to provide a systematic review on the neonatal safety profile of these drugs during breastfeeding, also assessing the limits of available tools. MethodsMEDLINE and PubMed databases were searched without any language restrictions by using the following set of keywords: ((SSRIs OR selective serotonin inhibitor reuptake OR SNRIs OR selective serotonin noradrenaline inhibitor reuptake) AND (breastfeeding OR lactation OR breast milk)). A separate search was also performed for each SSRIs (paroxetine, fluvoxamine, fluoxetine, sertraline, citalopram and escitalopram) and SNRIs (venlafaxine and duloxetine). ResultsSertraline and paroxetine show a better neonatal safety profile during breastfeeding as compared with other SRIs. Less data are available for fluvoxamine, escitalopram and duloxetine. Few studies followed up infants breastfeed for assessing the neurodevelopmental outcomes. ConclusionsLiterature review clearly indicates paroxetine and sertraline as the drugs that should be preferred as first line choice in nursing women who need an antidepressant treatment. Copyright (c) 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据