Nanxue Duan , Yulin Zhang , Shaoyang Wang , Jian Guan , Yang Ji , Wanling Huang , Rui Qian , Hao Zheng , Tongjian Bai , Yanghua Tian
{"title":"评估无创脑刺激治疗广泛性焦虑障碍的疗效和可接受性:一项系统综述和网络荟萃分析","authors":"Nanxue Duan , Yulin Zhang , Shaoyang Wang , Jian Guan , Yang Ji , Wanling Huang , Rui Qian , Hao Zheng , Tongjian Bai , Yanghua Tian","doi":"10.1016/j.pscychresns.2025.111989","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) has the potential to treat generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). To assess the efficacy (response/remission/post-treatment continuous anxiety severity scores) and acceptability (failure to complete treatment for any reason) of NIBS, we searched PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library (as of April 2024) for articles on NIBS for GAD and conducted a network meta-analysis of eight randomized trials (20 treatment arms, 405 participants). Data were pooled using standardized mean difference (SMD) and odds ratio (OR) with 95 % confidence interval (CI). Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) was the most widely studied treatment for GAD. The right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) was the most common treatment target for GAD. High-frequency rTMS showed higher response rates (OR 291.40, 95 % CI 13.08 to 6490.21) and remission rates (OR 182.14, 95 % CI 8.72 to 3805.76) compared with other active therapies. Continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS) greatly improved continuous post-treatment anxiety severity scores (SMD -2.56, 95 % CI -3.16 to -1.96). No significant differences in acceptability were found between the treatment strategies and the sham stimulation group. These findings provide evidence to consider NIBS techniques as alternative or adjunctive treatments for GAD.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":20776,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging","volume":"349 ","pages":"Article 111989"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the efficacy and acceptability of non-invasive brain stimulation for generalized anxiety disorder: a systematic review and network meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Nanxue Duan , Yulin Zhang , Shaoyang Wang , Jian Guan , Yang Ji , Wanling Huang , Rui Qian , Hao Zheng , Tongjian Bai , Yanghua Tian\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.pscychresns.2025.111989\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) has the potential to treat generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). To assess the efficacy (response/remission/post-treatment continuous anxiety severity scores) and acceptability (failure to complete treatment for any reason) of NIBS, we searched PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library (as of April 2024) for articles on NIBS for GAD and conducted a network meta-analysis of eight randomized trials (20 treatment arms, 405 participants). Data were pooled using standardized mean difference (SMD) and odds ratio (OR) with 95 % confidence interval (CI). Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) was the most widely studied treatment for GAD. The right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) was the most common treatment target for GAD. High-frequency rTMS showed higher response rates (OR 291.40, 95 % CI 13.08 to 6490.21) and remission rates (OR 182.14, 95 % CI 8.72 to 3805.76) compared with other active therapies. Continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS) greatly improved continuous post-treatment anxiety severity scores (SMD -2.56, 95 % CI -3.16 to -1.96). No significant differences in acceptability were found between the treatment strategies and the sham stimulation group. These findings provide evidence to consider NIBS techniques as alternative or adjunctive treatments for GAD.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20776,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging\",\"volume\":\"349 \",\"pages\":\"Article 111989\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925492725000447\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925492725000447","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
非侵入性脑刺激(NIBS)具有治疗广泛性焦虑症(GAD)的潜力。为了评估NIBS的疗效(反应/缓解/治疗后持续焦虑严重程度评分)和可接受性(任何原因未能完成治疗),我们检索了PubMed、Web of Science和Cochrane图书馆(截至2024年4月)关于NIBS治疗广广性焦虑症的文章,并对8项随机试验(20个治疗组,405名参与者)进行了网络荟萃分析。采用标准化平均差(SMD)和95%置信区间(CI)的优势比(OR)合并数据。重复经颅磁刺激(rTMS)是最广泛研究的治疗广泛性焦虑症。右背外侧前额叶皮层(DLPFC)是广泛性焦虑症最常见的治疗靶点。与其他积极疗法相比,高频rTMS显示更高的缓解率(OR 291.40, 95% CI 13.08至6490.21)和缓解率(OR 182.14, 95% CI 8.72至3805.76)。连续θ波爆发刺激(cTBS)显著改善治疗后持续焦虑严重程度评分(SMD -2.56, 95% CI -3.16至-1.96)。治疗策略与假刺激组在可接受性上无显著差异。这些发现为考虑NIBS技术作为广泛性焦虑症的替代或辅助治疗提供了证据。
Evaluating the efficacy and acceptability of non-invasive brain stimulation for generalized anxiety disorder: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) has the potential to treat generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). To assess the efficacy (response/remission/post-treatment continuous anxiety severity scores) and acceptability (failure to complete treatment for any reason) of NIBS, we searched PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library (as of April 2024) for articles on NIBS for GAD and conducted a network meta-analysis of eight randomized trials (20 treatment arms, 405 participants). Data were pooled using standardized mean difference (SMD) and odds ratio (OR) with 95 % confidence interval (CI). Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) was the most widely studied treatment for GAD. The right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) was the most common treatment target for GAD. High-frequency rTMS showed higher response rates (OR 291.40, 95 % CI 13.08 to 6490.21) and remission rates (OR 182.14, 95 % CI 8.72 to 3805.76) compared with other active therapies. Continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS) greatly improved continuous post-treatment anxiety severity scores (SMD -2.56, 95 % CI -3.16 to -1.96). No significant differences in acceptability were found between the treatment strategies and the sham stimulation group. These findings provide evidence to consider NIBS techniques as alternative or adjunctive treatments for GAD.
期刊介绍:
The Neuroimaging section of Psychiatry Research publishes manuscripts on positron emission tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, computerized electroencephalographic topography, regional cerebral blood flow, computed tomography, magnetoencephalography, autoradiography, post-mortem regional analyses, and other imaging techniques. Reports concerning results in psychiatric disorders, dementias, and the effects of behaviorial tasks and pharmacological treatments are featured. We also invite manuscripts on the methods of obtaining images and computer processing of the images themselves. Selected case reports are also published.