每天两次对一次高频重复经颅磁刺激治疗难治性抑郁症:一项随机假对照试验

C. Theleritis, P. Sakkas, T. Paparrigopoulos, S. Vitoratou, C. Tzavara, S. Bonaccorso, A. Politis, C. Soldatos, Costantin Psarros
{"title":"每天两次对一次高频重复经颅磁刺激治疗难治性抑郁症:一项随机假对照试验","authors":"C. Theleritis, P. Sakkas, T. Paparrigopoulos, S. Vitoratou, C. Tzavara, S. Bonaccorso, A. Politis, C. Soldatos, Costantin Psarros","doi":"10.1097/YCT.0000000000000387","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives High-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (HF-rTMS) has proven antidepressant effects, but the optimal frequency of sessions remains unclear. Methods We conducted a 3-week, sham-controlled trial to assess the antidepressant efficacy of 1 active HF-rTMS session per day (A1 group) compared with 2 per day (A2 group) and equivalent sham sessions (once a day, S1 group; twice a day, S2 group) in patients with treatment-resistant major depression with a subsequent 2-week follow-up period. One hundred seventy-seven patients were screened, of whom 105 met eligibility criteria and 98 consented and were randomized. The HF-rTMS (20 Hz) was targeted to the left prefrontal cortex in sessions of approximately 40 trains (2 seconds each) at 100% resting motor threshold with an intertrain interval of 1 minute. Treatment response was defined as a 50% or greater decrease in the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) score and/or Clinician Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) score of 3 or less. Remission was defined as HDRS score less than 8 and/or CGI-S score of 2 or less. Results Practically none of the subjects in either sham groups achieved remission. Increased odds of remission were present for CGI-S by stimulating twice rather than once per day (odds ratio [OR] = 1.5, P = 0.018), whereas there was a marginal result for HDRS (OR = 3.9, P = 0.066). Patients who had lower baseline HDRS (OR = 0.75, P = 0.014) and CGI-S scores (OR = 0.18, P = 0.001) were more likely to achieve remission. Conclusions Twice per day active HF-rTMS might be more effective than once per day active HF-rTMS or sham stimulation.","PeriodicalId":287576,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of ECT","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"35","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Two Versus One High-Frequency Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Session per Day for Treatment-Resistant Depression: A Randomized Sham-Controlled Trial\",\"authors\":\"C. Theleritis, P. Sakkas, T. Paparrigopoulos, S. Vitoratou, C. Tzavara, S. Bonaccorso, A. Politis, C. Soldatos, Costantin Psarros\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/YCT.0000000000000387\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objectives High-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (HF-rTMS) has proven antidepressant effects, but the optimal frequency of sessions remains unclear. Methods We conducted a 3-week, sham-controlled trial to assess the antidepressant efficacy of 1 active HF-rTMS session per day (A1 group) compared with 2 per day (A2 group) and equivalent sham sessions (once a day, S1 group; twice a day, S2 group) in patients with treatment-resistant major depression with a subsequent 2-week follow-up period. One hundred seventy-seven patients were screened, of whom 105 met eligibility criteria and 98 consented and were randomized. The HF-rTMS (20 Hz) was targeted to the left prefrontal cortex in sessions of approximately 40 trains (2 seconds each) at 100% resting motor threshold with an intertrain interval of 1 minute. Treatment response was defined as a 50% or greater decrease in the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) score and/or Clinician Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) score of 3 or less. Remission was defined as HDRS score less than 8 and/or CGI-S score of 2 or less. Results Practically none of the subjects in either sham groups achieved remission. Increased odds of remission were present for CGI-S by stimulating twice rather than once per day (odds ratio [OR] = 1.5, P = 0.018), whereas there was a marginal result for HDRS (OR = 3.9, P = 0.066). Patients who had lower baseline HDRS (OR = 0.75, P = 0.014) and CGI-S scores (OR = 0.18, P = 0.001) were more likely to achieve remission. Conclusions Twice per day active HF-rTMS might be more effective than once per day active HF-rTMS or sham stimulation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":287576,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of ECT\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"35\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of ECT\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/YCT.0000000000000387\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of ECT","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/YCT.0000000000000387","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 35

摘要

目的高频重复经颅磁刺激(HF-rTMS)已被证实具有抗抑郁作用,但最佳频率仍不清楚。方法我们进行了一项为期3周的假对照试验,以评估每天1次活跃的HF-rTMS (A1组)与每天2次(A2组)和等效假疗程(每天1次,S1组;治疗难治性重度抑郁症患者每日2次(S2组),随访2周。177例患者被筛选,其中105例符合资格标准,98例同意并随机分配。高频- rtms (20 Hz)以大约40次训练(每次2秒)为目标,以100%静息运动阈值为目标,训练间隔为1分钟。治疗反应被定义为汉密尔顿抑郁评定量表(HDRS)得分下降50%或以上和/或临床总体印象-疾病严重程度(CGI-S)得分3或以下。缓解被定义为HDRS评分低于8和/或CGI-S评分低于2。结果两组患者均未获得缓解。通过每天刺激两次而不是一次,CGI-S缓解的几率增加(优势比[OR] = 1.5, P = 0.018),而HDRS则有边际结果(OR = 3.9, P = 0.066)。基线HDRS (OR = 0.75, P = 0.014)和CGI-S评分(OR = 0.18, P = 0.001)较低的患者更有可能获得缓解。结论每日2次的高频rtms可能比每日1次的高频rtms或假刺激更有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Two Versus One High-Frequency Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Session per Day for Treatment-Resistant Depression: A Randomized Sham-Controlled Trial
Objectives High-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (HF-rTMS) has proven antidepressant effects, but the optimal frequency of sessions remains unclear. Methods We conducted a 3-week, sham-controlled trial to assess the antidepressant efficacy of 1 active HF-rTMS session per day (A1 group) compared with 2 per day (A2 group) and equivalent sham sessions (once a day, S1 group; twice a day, S2 group) in patients with treatment-resistant major depression with a subsequent 2-week follow-up period. One hundred seventy-seven patients were screened, of whom 105 met eligibility criteria and 98 consented and were randomized. The HF-rTMS (20 Hz) was targeted to the left prefrontal cortex in sessions of approximately 40 trains (2 seconds each) at 100% resting motor threshold with an intertrain interval of 1 minute. Treatment response was defined as a 50% or greater decrease in the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) score and/or Clinician Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) score of 3 or less. Remission was defined as HDRS score less than 8 and/or CGI-S score of 2 or less. Results Practically none of the subjects in either sham groups achieved remission. Increased odds of remission were present for CGI-S by stimulating twice rather than once per day (odds ratio [OR] = 1.5, P = 0.018), whereas there was a marginal result for HDRS (OR = 3.9, P = 0.066). Patients who had lower baseline HDRS (OR = 0.75, P = 0.014) and CGI-S scores (OR = 0.18, P = 0.001) were more likely to achieve remission. Conclusions Twice per day active HF-rTMS might be more effective than once per day active HF-rTMS or sham stimulation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信