4.6 Review

Oral ketamine for the treatment of pain and treatment-resistant depression

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY
Volume 208, Issue 2, Pages 108-113

Publisher

ROYAL COLL PSYCHIATRISTS
DOI: 10.1192/bjp.bp.115.165498

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Recent studies with intravenous (i.v.) application of ketamine show remarkable but short-term success in patients with MDD. Studies in patients with chronic pain have used different ketamine applications for longer time periods. This experience may be relevant for psychiatric indications. Aims To review the literature about the dosing regimen, duration, effects and side-effects of oral, intravenous, intranasal and subcutaneous routes of administration of ketamine for treatment-resistant depression and pain. Method Searches in PubMed with the terms 'oral ketamine', 'depression', 'chronic pain', 'neuropathic pain', 'intravenous ketamine', 'intranasal ketamine' and 'subcutaneous ketamine' yielded 88 articles. We reviewed all papers for information about dosing regimen, number of individuals who received ketamine, number of ketamine days per study, results and side-effects, as well as study quality. Results Overall, the methodological strength of studies investigating the antidepressant effects of ketamine was considered low, regardless of the route of administration. The doses for depression were in the lower range compared with studies that investigated analgesic use. Studies on pain suggested that oral ketamine may be acceptable for treatment-resistant depression in terms of tolerability and side-effects. Conclusions Oral ketamine, given for longer time periods in the described doses, appears to be well tolerated, but few studies have systematically examined the longer-term negative consequences. The short- and longer-term depression outcomes as well as side-effects need to be studied with rigorous randomised controlled trials.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available