Cognitive preservation and antidepressant efficacy of magnetic seizure therapy in adolescents with treatment resistant major depressive disorder in China: A randomized controlled trial.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q4 PSYCHIATRY
Wei Wang, Yi Lu, Guo-Lin Mi, Su-Fang Qi
{"title":"Cognitive preservation and antidepressant efficacy of magnetic seizure therapy in adolescents with treatment resistant major depressive disorder in China: A randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Wei Wang, Yi Lu, Guo-Lin Mi, Su-Fang Qi","doi":"10.1177/00912174251364987","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>ObjectiveTo compare the antidepressant efficacy, cognitive impact, and safety profile of magnetic seizure therapy (MST) vs. modified electroconvulsive therapy (MECT) in Chinese adolescents with treatment-resistant major depressive disorder (MDD).MethodsThis single-center, evaluator-blinded, prospective randomized controlled trial enrolled 120 adolescents aged 13-18 years diagnosed with treatment-resistant MDD. Participants were randomly assigned to either the MST group or the MECT group (n = 60 per group). The primary outcome was improvement in depressive symptoms measured by the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) score. Secondary outcomes included changes in cognitive function assessed by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), time to reorientation, and adverse event incidence per CTCAE 5.0 criteria.ResultsThe reduction of depressive symptoms on the BDI-II was significantly greater in the MECT group (51.8%) compared to the MST group (46.5%) (<i>P</i> < 0.001), although clinical response rates were similar (90.0% vs 91.1%). The MST group showed significant improvement in MoCA total score, whereas the MECT group demonstrated a slight decline (<i>P</i> < 0.001). MST was associated with greater cognitive preservation (+0.96 vs 0.36 MoCA score), fewer adverse events (28.9% vs 64.0%, <i>P</i> < 0.001), and faster reorientation (6.9 ± 1.8 min vs 18.7 ± 6.8 min, <i>P</i> < 0.001) compared to MECT.ConclusionMST exhibited comparable antidepressant efficacy to MECT while offering superior cognitive protection and safety in adolescents with treatment-resistant MDD. These findings suggest MST may be a preferred treatment option balancing symptom relief with neurodevelopmental preservation.</p>","PeriodicalId":50294,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Psychiatry in Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"64-75"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Psychiatry in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00912174251364987","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ObjectiveTo compare the antidepressant efficacy, cognitive impact, and safety profile of magnetic seizure therapy (MST) vs. modified electroconvulsive therapy (MECT) in Chinese adolescents with treatment-resistant major depressive disorder (MDD).MethodsThis single-center, evaluator-blinded, prospective randomized controlled trial enrolled 120 adolescents aged 13-18 years diagnosed with treatment-resistant MDD. Participants were randomly assigned to either the MST group or the MECT group (n = 60 per group). The primary outcome was improvement in depressive symptoms measured by the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) score. Secondary outcomes included changes in cognitive function assessed by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), time to reorientation, and adverse event incidence per CTCAE 5.0 criteria.ResultsThe reduction of depressive symptoms on the BDI-II was significantly greater in the MECT group (51.8%) compared to the MST group (46.5%) (P < 0.001), although clinical response rates were similar (90.0% vs 91.1%). The MST group showed significant improvement in MoCA total score, whereas the MECT group demonstrated a slight decline (P < 0.001). MST was associated with greater cognitive preservation (+0.96 vs 0.36 MoCA score), fewer adverse events (28.9% vs 64.0%, P < 0.001), and faster reorientation (6.9 ± 1.8 min vs 18.7 ± 6.8 min, P < 0.001) compared to MECT.ConclusionMST exhibited comparable antidepressant efficacy to MECT while offering superior cognitive protection and safety in adolescents with treatment-resistant MDD. These findings suggest MST may be a preferred treatment option balancing symptom relief with neurodevelopmental preservation.

中国青少年治疗难治性重性抑郁症的磁发作治疗的认知保护和抗抑郁疗效:一项随机对照试验。
目的比较磁发作治疗(MST)与改良电惊厥治疗(MECT)对中国青少年难治性重度抑郁症(MDD)的抗抑郁疗效、认知影响和安全性。方法本研究为单中心、评估者盲法、前瞻性随机对照试验,纳入了120名年龄在13-18岁、被诊断为难治性重度抑郁症的青少年。参与者被随机分配到MST组或MECT组(每组n = 60)。主要结局是通过贝克抑郁量表- ii (BDI-II)评分降低率测量抑郁症状的改善。次要结局包括蒙特利尔认知评估(MoCA)评估的认知功能变化、重新定向时间和CTCAE 5.0标准的不良事件发生率。结果MECT组BDI-II降低率(51.8%)显著高于MST组(46.5%)(P < 0.001),但临床有效率相似(90.0% vs 91.1%)。MST组MoCA总分显著提高,MECT组MoCA总分略有下降(P < 0.001)。MST与更大的认知保存(+0.96 vs -0.36 MoCA评分),更少的不良事件(28.9% vs 64.0%, P < 0.001)和更快的重新定位(6.9±1.8 min vs 18.7±6.8 min, P < 0.001)相关。结论mst在治疗难治性MDD的青少年患者中具有与MECT相当的抗抑郁疗效,同时提供更好的认知保护和安全性。这些发现表明MST可能是平衡症状缓解和神经发育保护的首选治疗选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
5.00%
发文量
55
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Psychiatry in Medicine (IJPM) bridges the gap between clinical psychiatry research and primary care clinical research. Providing a forum for addressing: The relevance of psychobiological, psychological, social, familial, religious, and cultural factors in the development and treatment of illness; the relationship of biomarkers to psychiatric symptoms and syndromes in primary care...
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书