Electroconvulsive Therapy and Ketamine Infusion in Patients with Bipolar I or II Depression: A Case Series.

Keming Gao, Evrim Bayrak Oruc, Heather Wobbe, Margret Musso, Buket Koparal
{"title":"Electroconvulsive Therapy and Ketamine Infusion in Patients with Bipolar I or II Depression: A Case Series.","authors":"Keming Gao, Evrim Bayrak Oruc, Heather Wobbe, Margret Musso, Buket Koparal","doi":"10.64719/pb.18534","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To compare the efficacy and safety of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) and ketamine infusion (KET-IFU) in routine care for patients with bipolar I or II depression (BPD).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Electronic medical records of patients who received ECT and/or KET-IFU were used to identify patients with BPD who received both ECT and KET-IFU treatments. The change in the 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology Self-Report (QIDS-16-SR) total score was used as an efficacy outcome. Self-reported side effects and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) were used as safety measures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six patients with BPD received both ECT and KET-IFU treatments. All patients received ECT first. Five patients received KET-IFU due to subjective memory concerns from ECT although their MoCA scores were within normal range. One patient with multiple previous ECT series received two KET-IFU series followed by an ECT series. Four patients responded to acute ECT treatments well with ⩾ 50% improvement in QIDS-16-SR total scores. Two of them also responded to KET-IFU well with ⩾ 50% improvement but the onset of antidepressant effect differed. One patient did not respond to ECT or KET-IFU. The patient who had two series of KET-IFU responded well during the first KET-IFU series but had limited benefit from the second KET-IFU series. No patient discontinued KET-IFU due to an adverse event.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Most patients responded to ECT well and half of them had similar benefit from KET-IFU as from ECT. Randomized, head-to-head comparison studies of ECT versus KET-IFU in BPD are warranted to confirm or refute these findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":94351,"journal":{"name":"Psychopharmacology bulletin","volume":"56 3","pages":"130-147"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13244333/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychopharmacology bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.64719/pb.18534","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: To compare the efficacy and safety of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) and ketamine infusion (KET-IFU) in routine care for patients with bipolar I or II depression (BPD).

Methods: Electronic medical records of patients who received ECT and/or KET-IFU were used to identify patients with BPD who received both ECT and KET-IFU treatments. The change in the 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology Self-Report (QIDS-16-SR) total score was used as an efficacy outcome. Self-reported side effects and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) were used as safety measures.

Results: Six patients with BPD received both ECT and KET-IFU treatments. All patients received ECT first. Five patients received KET-IFU due to subjective memory concerns from ECT although their MoCA scores were within normal range. One patient with multiple previous ECT series received two KET-IFU series followed by an ECT series. Four patients responded to acute ECT treatments well with ⩾ 50% improvement in QIDS-16-SR total scores. Two of them also responded to KET-IFU well with ⩾ 50% improvement but the onset of antidepressant effect differed. One patient did not respond to ECT or KET-IFU. The patient who had two series of KET-IFU responded well during the first KET-IFU series but had limited benefit from the second KET-IFU series. No patient discontinued KET-IFU due to an adverse event.

Conclusion: Most patients responded to ECT well and half of them had similar benefit from KET-IFU as from ECT. Randomized, head-to-head comparison studies of ECT versus KET-IFU in BPD are warranted to confirm or refute these findings.

电痉挛疗法和氯胺酮输注治疗双相I型或II型抑郁症患者:一个病例系列。
目的:比较电惊厥治疗(ECT)和氯胺酮输注(KET-IFU)在双相I型或II型抑郁症(BPD)患者常规护理中的疗效和安全性。方法:使用接受ECT和/或KET-IFU治疗的患者的电子病历来识别同时接受ECT和KET-IFU治疗的BPD患者。以16项抑郁症状自我报告快速量表(QIDS-16-SR)总分的变化作为疗效评价指标。自我报告的副作用和蒙特利尔认知评估(MoCA)作为安全措施。结果:6例BPD患者同时接受了ECT和KET-IFU治疗。所有患者均先接受电痉挛治疗。5例患者由于ECT引起的主观记忆问题而接受KET-IFU治疗,尽管他们的MoCA评分在正常范围内。一名既往有多次ECT治疗的患者接受了两次KET-IFU治疗,随后又接受了一次ECT治疗。四名患者对急性ECT治疗反应良好,在QIDS-16-SR总分中改善了50%。其中两人对KET-IFU的反应也很好,改善了50%,但抗抑郁药效果的开始有所不同。一名患者对ECT或KET-IFU没有反应。接受两个系列KET-IFU治疗的患者在第一次KET-IFU治疗期间反应良好,但从第二次KET-IFU治疗中获益有限。无患者因不良事件停用KET-IFU。结论:大多数患者对电痉挛治疗反应良好,其中半数患者采用KET-IFU治疗的获益与电痉挛治疗相似。在BPD中,随机的、头对头的比较研究ECT与KET-IFU有必要证实或反驳这些发现。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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