Sertraline versus escitalopram in South Asians with moderate to severe major depressive disorder: (SOUTH-DEP) a double-blind, parallel, randomized controlled trial.

Objective: The study design included the double-blind, parallel, randomized controlled trial. The aim of this randomized controlled trial was to compare the efficacy and safety of sertraline and escitalopram in participants with moderate to severe major depressive disorder (MDD). Methods: The study was conducted in South Asian participants. A total of 744 participants with moderate to severe MDD were randomly assigned to receive either sertraline or escitalopram for 8 weeks. Drug dosages and titration schedules were based on the recommendations of the prescribing information for each product and according to the judgment of the clinicians involved in the study. The primary outcome measures were changes from baseline on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the clinical global impression (CGI) scale as well as the frequency of adverse events in both groups. Baseline MADRS scores in the escitalopram and sertraline groups were 28.2±0.47 (mean±SD) and 29.70±0.46 (mean±SD) respectively, and was no variability in the baseline assessments. Changes in MADRS as well as CGI scales at the end of the study were significant only for the sertraline group whereas they remained statistically nonsignificant for the escitalopram group. Results: The results of the study showed that sertraline was more efficacious than escitalopram in reducing depression rating scales such as MADRS and CGI, and that participants subjectively felt better regarding their symptoms in the sertraline group. Sertraline displays enhanced safety or tolerability than other groups of antidepressants, which frequently cause high levels of drowsiness, dizziness, blurred vision, and other undesirable effects. Adverse events were seen in both groups, but delayed ejaculation was the most frequent adverse event seen in both groups. However, a greater number of participants reported having nausea and insomnia in the sertraline group compared to the escitalopram group. Conclusion: Our study clearly highlights that there is a statistically significant difference in efficacy between sertraline and escitalopram at the doses used in our study. Sertraline was able to significantly lower the depression rating scales like MADRS and CGI in participants with moderate to severe MDD. Participants subjectively felt better regarding their symptoms in the sertraline group. The most frequent adverse event in both groups was delayed ejaculation. From an efficacy standpoint, sertraline was more efficacious than escitalopram. The study indicates that the prevalence of depressive disorders in South Asia is comparable to the global estimate, and Bangladesh and India has higher proportions of people with depressive disorders in South Asia. Additionally, females and older adults (75-79 years) have the highest burden of depressive disorders across all countries in the region. This study's limitation included the absence of a placebo arm. An additional limitation of the current study was the lack of an evaluation of inter-rater reliability and the research sample could not have been uniform in terms of the kind of depressive disorders and bipolarity.

Safety and cost-effectiveness of same-day complex left atrial ablation.

BACKGROUND: Catheter ablation for complex left-atrial arrhythmia is increasing worldwide with many centres admitting patients overnight. Same-day procedures using conscious sedation carry significant benefits to patients/healthcare providers but data are limited. We evaluated the safety and cost-effectiveness of same-day complex left-atrial arrhythmia ablation. METHOD: Multi-centre retrospective cohort study of all consecutive complex elective left-atrial ablation procedures performed between January 2011 and December 2019. Data were collected on planned same-day discharge versus overnight stay, baseline parameters, procedure details/success, ablation technology, post-operative complications, unplanned overnight admissions/outcomes at 4-months and mortality up to April 2020. A cost analysis of potential savings was also performed. RESULTS: A total of 967 consecutive patients underwent complex left-ablation using radiofrequency (point-by-point ablation aided by 3D-mapping or PVAC catheter ablation with fluoroscopic screening) or cryoballoon-ablation (mean age: 60.9 ± 11.6 years, range 23-83 yrs., 572 [59%] females). The majority of patients had isolation of pulmonary veins alone (n = 846, 87%) and most using conscious-sedation alone (n = 921, 95%). Of the total cohort, 414 (43%) had planned same-day procedure with 35 (8%) admitted overnight due to major (n = 5) or minor (n = 30) complications. Overall acute procedural success-rate was 96% (n = 932). Complications in planned overnight-stay/same-day cohorts were low. At 4-month follow-up there were 62 (6.4%) readmissions (femoral haematomas, palpitation, other reasons); there were 3 deaths at mean follow-up of 42.0 ± 27.6 months, none related to the procedure. Overnight stay costs £350; the same-day ablation policy over this period would have saved £310,450. CONCLUSIONS: Same-day complex left-atrial catheter ablation using conscious sedation is safe and cost-effective with significant benefits for patients and healthcare providers. This is especially important in the current financial climate and Covid-19 pandemic.