Risk of stroke in prescription and other amphetamine-type stimulants use: A systematic review
Blanca Iciar Indave1, Luis Sordo1,2,3, María José Bravo1,2
1National Center for Epidemiology, Carlos III Institute of Health, Madrid, Spain.
Introduction And Aims:
Amphetamine-type stimulants (ATS) are a putative cause of stroke with high abuse potential. We aim to systematically review the association between use of ATS and stroke.
Design And Methods:
To assure a sensitive search strategy, a broad definition of ATS was used. Cochrane Plus, EMBASE, IBECS/Lilacs, ISI WOK, Medline and Scopus were searched through 2016. Three researchers independently reviewed studies (Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses). Validity and bias were appraised.
Results:
Of 3998 articles, four cohort studies and eight case-control studies (CCS) were selected; 11 focused on prescribed or over-the-counter ATS. Current ATS users showed a higher ischaemic stroke risk than non-users in two cohort studies {adjusted rate ratio = 1.6 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.1, 2.4] and 3.4 [95% CI = 1.1, 10.6]}. One study observed increased risk of haemorrhagic stroke in former users versus non-users [adjusted rate ratio = 2.3 (95% CI = 1.3, 4.1)]. Higher haemorrhagic stroke risk was seen in two CCS among women using ATS [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 16.6 (95% CI = 1.5, 182.2) and 3.9 (95% CI = 1.1, 13.1)]. All-stroke was negatively associated with ATS in another CCS [aOR = 0.4 (95% CI = 0.2, 0.8)] and positively associated in the only study on non-medical ATS [aOR = 3.8 (95% CI = 1.2, 12.6)]. Selection bias and uncontrolled confounding were common.
Discussion And Conclusions:
This is the first systematic review on ATS and stroke. Limited epidemiological evidence suggests that ATS use increases stroke risk. Possible disparities in ATS effect across stroke type and higher effect in women deserve further clarification. Studies on non-medical ATS use should be a priority. [Indave BI, Sordo L, Bravo MJ, Sarasa-Renedo A, Fernández-Balbuena S, De la Fuente L, Sonego M, Barrio G. Risk of stroke in prescription and other amphetamine-type stimulants use: A systematic review. Drug Alcohol Rev 2018;37:56-69].
More Related Videos
09:16A General Method for Evaluating Deep Brain Stimulation Effects on Intravenous Methamphetamine Self-Administration
Published on: January 22, 2016
10:02Event Related Potentials ERPs and other EEG Based Methods for Extracting Biomarkers of Brain Dysfunction: Examples from Pediatric Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder ADHD
Published on: March 12, 2020
Related Concept Videos
01:29Stimulants
Cocaine can be administered via snorting, injection, or smoking. It primarily functions by blocking the reuptake of dopamine, resulting in a euphoric high characterized by an intense sensation of happiness and...
01:30Cognitive Enhancers: Cholinesterase Inhibitors and NMDA Receptor Antagonists
01:24CNS Stimulants: Cocaine, Amphetamines and Cannabinoids
01:24Drug Toxicity: Risk factors
01:30Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder
Diagnostic Criteria and Symptoms
To diagnose ADHD, symptoms must manifest before age 12 and be evident across multiple settings....
01:23Drugs Acting on Autonomic Ganglia: Stimulants
Ganglionic stimulants activate NM nicotinic receptors in autonomic ganglia, falling into two categories: nicotine mimetics [e.g., lobeline, dimethylpiperazine, tetramethylammonium] and muscarinic receptor agonists [e.g., muscarine, methacholine]. The first category's action is rapid and blocked by nicotinic receptor antagonists, while the second category's action is delayed and blocked by atropine-like agents. Nicotine, an alkaloid, affects the heart rate by stimulating...