Article Summary

Clinical Summary: Lorazepam Versus Diazepam in Alcohol Dependence Syndrome: Which Is Better?

Choosing a benzodiazepine for alcohol withdrawal often comes down to habit, even though clinicians must balance symptom control, hepatic considerations, and co-occurring anxiety or depressive symptoms. This study directly compares lorazepam and diazepam in a symptom-triggered detoxification protocol and asks the practical question clinicians face on the ward: does either drug work better in moderate alcohol withdrawal?

Design a prospective, randomized interventional study
N a final sample of 60 patients (30 per group)
Population Male patients in the age group of ≥25 years, CIWA-Ar score <15, were admitted to the substance use disorder ward of the psychiatry department of a tertiary care teaching hospital in Northern India.
Duration until week 12 of the study (including treatment with baclofen)

Key Findings

  • Withdrawal symptoms improved similarly in both groups: baseline CIWA-Ar scores were 11.07 in the lorazepam group and 10.9 in the diazepam group (P = .795), fell to 1.97 after detoxification in both groups (P = .999), and reached 0.13 versus 0 at 12 weeks (P = .321).
  • The overall reduction in CIWA-Ar scores was nearly identical between lorazepam and diazepam (−10.93 vs −10.9; P = .960), indicating no efficacy advantage for either agent in symptom-triggered detoxification.
  • Time to >50% reduction in withdrawal symptoms did not differ significantly: diazepam was numerically faster at 4.6 days versus 4.97 days for lorazepam (P = .241), and both drugs were equally effective in achieving a 50% reduction in withdrawal symptoms (P = .214).
  • Anxiety outcomes were comparable over 12 weeks: HAM-A scores declined from 2.27 to 0.17 with lorazepam and from 1.33 to 0 with diazepam, with no significant between-group differences at baseline (P = .122), postdetoxification (P = .327), or 12 weeks (P = .321); total reduction was −2.1 vs −1.33 (P = .146).
  • Depressive symptoms also improved similarly: HAM-D scores declined from 2.47 to 0.27 with lorazepam and from 1.2 to 0 with diazepam, with no significant between-group differences at baseline (P = .100), postdetoxification (P = .079), or 12 weeks (P = .321); total reduction was −2.2 vs. −1.2 (P = .103).
Clinical Bottom Line

For male inpatients with moderate alcohol withdrawal, symptom-triggered lorazepam and diazepam delivered equivalent clinical outcomes for withdrawal, anxiety, and depressive symptoms over 12 weeks. Choice between them should be based on clinical context and pharmacokinetic considerations rather than expectation of superior efficacy.

Practice Implications

  • For relatively uncomplicated alcohol withdrawal, either lorazepam or diazepam can be used in a symptom-triggered regimen without expecting a meaningful difference in CIWA-Ar improvement, since CIWA-Ar reductions were nearly identical (−10.93 vs −10.9; P = .960).
  • If using oral symptom-triggered detoxification similar to this study, lorazepam was initiated at 4 mg/day initiation; 3–4 divided dosages and 1 mg/day titration, while diazepam was initiated at 10 mg/day initiation; 1–2 dosages per day and 5 mg/day titration, with tapering once 50% relief in withdrawal symptoms was noted.
  • Do not select lorazepam over diazepam solely to improve mild anxiety or depressive symptoms during withdrawal follow-up, because HAM-A and HAM-D improvements were numerically greater with lorazepam but not statistically significant (HAM-A P = .146; HAM-D P = .103).
  • Monitor liver parameters during follow-up, as SGPT decreased significantly more with diazepam (P = .013), although other physiological parameters were similar and the clinical significance of this isolated difference remains uncertain within this study.
Read full article
Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc. (PPP) makes no warranties about the accuracy or completeness of any information published in The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry or other PPP materials, and disclaims liability for any use or non-use of that information. Clinicians should not rely solely on these materials and should exercise their own professional judgment when making patient care decisions on an individualized basis.