Why the study?
Do vasodilators with primarily metabolic action provide greater clinical benefit than those with only vasodilator action in aged patients with senile dementia?
Do vasodilators with primarily metabolic action provide greater clinical benefit than those with only vasodilator action in aged patients with senile dementia?
Vasodilators with metabolic effects may offer more clinical benefit in senile dementia than pure vasodilators, though existing studies suffer from significant methodological flaws.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May favor metabolic vasodilators over pure ones in senile dementia; leaves open pending rigorous trials.
The rationale for the use of vasodilators in the aged has changed from the attempt to increase cerebral blood flow to the attempt to improve cerebral metabolism. Review of 102 studies of eight vasodilators showed that significantly more controlled studies claimed practical clinical benefit from drugs supposed to improve neuronal intermediary metabolism with secondary vasodilatation than from drugs supposed to have only vasodilator action (P less than .005). Studies of both classes of drugs often suffered from poor study design, inappropriate and inconsistent application of outcome measurements, as well as negative bias due to selection of severely demented subjects. Future studies should be placebo-controlled investigations of drugs with primarily metabolic action, address questions of dose and time response, consistently use appropriate outcome measurement, and concentrate on the elderly in whom cognitive improvement is possible.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jerome A. Yesavage (1979) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: