BACKGROUND: Concerns about the cardiovascular safety of medications used for the treatment of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) remain. We aimed to compare the effects of pharmacological treatments for ADHD on haemodynamic values and electrocardiogram (ECG) parameters in children, adolescents, and adults.
METHODS: For this systematic review and network meta-analysis, we searched 12 electronic databases, including Cochrane CENTRAL, Embase, PubMed, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, from database inception to Jan 18, 2024, for published and unpublished randomised controlled trials comparing amphetamines, atomoxetine, bupropion, clonidine, guanfacine, lisdexamfetamine, methylphenidate, modafinil, or viloxazine against each other or placebo. Primary outcomes were change in systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP), measured in mm Hg, and pulse, measured in beats per minute, at timepoints closest to 12 weeks, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks. Summary data were extracted and pooled in random-effects network meta-analyses. Certainty of evidence was assessed with the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) framework. This study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021295352. Before study initiation, we contacted representatives of a UK-based charity of people with lived experience of ADHD-the ADHD Foundation-regarding the relevance of the topic and the appropriateness of the outcomes chosen.
FINDINGS: 102 randomised controlled trials with short-term follow-up (median 7 weeks [IQR 5-9]) were included, encompassing 13 315 children and adolescents (aged ≥5 years and <18 years; mean age 11 years [SD 3]; of available data, 9635 [73%] were male and 3646 [27%] were female; of available data, 289 [2%] were Asian, 1719 [15%] were Black, and 8303 [71%] were White) and 9387 adults (≥18 years, mean age 35 years [11]; of available data, 5064 [57%] were male and 3809 [43%] were female; of available data, 488 [6%] were Asian, 457 [6%] were Black, and 6372 [79%] were White). Amphetamines, atomoxetine, lisdexamfetamine, methylphenidate, and viloxazine led to increments in haemodynamic values in children and adolescents, adults, or both. In children and adolescents, mean increase against placebo ranged from 1·07 (95% CI 0·36-1·79; moderate CINeMA confidence) with atomoxetine to 1·81 (1·05-2·57; moderate) with methylphenidate for SBP; from 1·93 (0·74-3·11; high) with amphetamines to 2·42 (1·69-3·15; low) with methylphenidate for DBP; and from 2·79 (1·05-4·53; moderate) with viloxazine to 5·58 (4·67-6·49; high) with atomoxetine for pulse. In adults, mean increase against placebo ranged from 1·66 (95% CI 0·38-2·93; very low) with methylphenidate to 2·3 (0·66-3·94; very low) with amphetamines for SBP; from 1·60 (0·29-2·91; very low) with methylphenidate to 3·07 (0·69-5·45; very low) with lisdexamfetamine for DBP; and from 4·37 (3·16-5·59; very low) with methylphenidate to 5·8 (2·3-9·3; very low) with viloxazine for pulse. Amphetamines, lisdexamfetamine, or methylphenidate were not associated with larger increments in haemodynamic values compared with atomoxetine or viloxazine in either children and adolescents or adults. Guanfacine was associated with decrements in haemodynamic values in children and adolescents (mean decrease against placebo of -2·83 [95% CI -3·8 to -1·85; low CINeMA confidence] in SBP, -2·08 [-3 to -1·17; low] in DBP, and -4·06 [-5·45 -2·68; moderate] in pulse) and adults (mean decrease against placebo of -10·1 [-13·76 to -6·44; very low] in SBP, -7·73 [-11·88 to -3·58; very low] in DBP, and -6·83 [-10·85 to -2·81; very low] in pulse). Only four RCTs informed on effects in the medium term and none on the long term.
INTERPRETATION: Practitioners should monitor blood pressure and pulse in patients with ADHD treated with any pharmacological intervention, and not stimulants only. Given the short duration of available randomised controlled trials, new research providing insights on the causal effects of ADHD medications on cardiovascular parameters in the longer term should be funded.
FUNDING: National Institute for Health and Care Research.
