Some statistically significant differences between citalopram and other antidepressants for the acute phase treatment of major depression were found in terms of efficacy , tolerability and acceptability .
Citalopram was more efficacious than paroxetine and reboxetine and more acceptable than tricyclics , reboxetine and venlafaxine , however , it seemed to be less efficacious than escitalopram .
BACKGROUND Recent US and UK clinical practice guidelines recommend that second-generation antidepressants should be considered amongst the best first-line options when drug therapy is indicated for a depressive episode .
Systematic review s have already highlighted some differences in efficacy between second-generation antidepressants .
Citalopram , one of the first selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors ( SSRI ) introduced in the market , is one of these antidepressant drugs that clinicians use for routine depression care .
OBJECTIVES To assess the evidence for the efficacy , acceptability and tolerability of citalopram in comparison with tricyclics , heterocyclics , other SSRIs and other conventional and non-conventional antidepressants in the acute-phase treatment of major depression .
Citalopram versus maprotiline: A controlled, clinical multicentre trial in depressed patients
ABSTRACT — In a double‐blind trial , comprising 96 depressed patients , citalopram was compared with maprotiline . The trial period was 6 weeks with ratings ( MADRS , CGI ) and side effects recordings taking place at Weeks 0 , 1 , 2 , 4 , and 6 . Both drugs were administered as a single evening dose , 40 or 60 mg for citalopram , and 75 or 150 mg for maprotiline .  MADRS total scores and CGI scores showed a highly significant reduction in both groups with no significant difference between them , whether the groups were considered as a whole or whether they were subdivided into endogenously/non‐endogenously depressed or melancholic/non‐melancholic patients . Side effects were not significantly different , but the maprotiline group showed more anticholinergic side effects , whereas the citalopram group showed more nausea , increased sweating and headache . Two patients on maprotiline were withdrawn because of side effects ( hypotension and somnolence in the one case ; tremor and insomnia in the other ) . One patient in each group was withdrawn because of increased transaminases , the citalopram‐treated patient having increased values , however , already at baseline . Apart from this , no cardiovascular side effects and no pathological laboratory values related to treatment were observed . The authors conclude that citalopram is a safe antidepressant drug and as effective as maprotiline
Some statistically significant differences between citalopram and other antidepressants for the acute phase treatment of major depression were found in terms of efficacy , tolerability and acceptability .
Citalopram was more efficacious than paroxetine and reboxetine and more acceptable than tricyclics , reboxetine and venlafaxine , however , it seemed to be less efficacious than escitalopram .
BACKGROUND Recent US and UK clinical practice guidelines recommend that second-generation antidepressants should be considered amongst the best first-line options when drug therapy is indicated for a depressive episode .
Systematic review s have already highlighted some differences in efficacy between second-generation antidepressants .
Citalopram , one of the first selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors ( SSRI ) introduced in the market , is one of these antidepressant drugs that clinicians use for routine depression care .
OBJECTIVES To assess the evidence for the efficacy , acceptability and tolerability of citalopram in comparison with tricyclics , heterocyclics , other SSRIs and other conventional and non-conventional antidepressants in the acute-phase treatment of major depression .