Cargando…

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of non-surgical brain stimulation for the acute treatment of major depressive episodes in adults: systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the comparative clinical efficacy and acceptability of non-surgical brain stimulation for the acute treatment of major depressive episodes in adults. DESIGN: Systematic review with pairwise and network meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Electronic search of Embase, PubMed/Medline, a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mutz, Julian, Vipulananthan, Vijeinika, Carter, Ben, Hurlemann, René, Fu, Cynthia H Y, Young, Allan H
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6435996/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30917990
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l1079
_version_ 1783406741337145344
author Mutz, Julian
Vipulananthan, Vijeinika
Carter, Ben
Hurlemann, René
Fu, Cynthia H Y
Young, Allan H
author_facet Mutz, Julian
Vipulananthan, Vijeinika
Carter, Ben
Hurlemann, René
Fu, Cynthia H Y
Young, Allan H
author_sort Mutz, Julian
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To estimate the comparative clinical efficacy and acceptability of non-surgical brain stimulation for the acute treatment of major depressive episodes in adults. DESIGN: Systematic review with pairwise and network meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Electronic search of Embase, PubMed/Medline, and PsycINFO up to 8 May 2018, supplemented by manual searches of bibliographies of several reviews (published between 2009 and 2018) and included trials. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Clinical trials with random allocation to electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), transcranial magnetic stimulation (repetitive (rTMS), accelerated, priming, deep, and synchronised), theta burst stimulation, magnetic seizure therapy, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), or sham therapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were response (efficacy) and all cause discontinuation (discontinuation of treatment for any reason) (acceptability), presented as odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Remission and continuous depression severity scores after treatment were also examined. RESULTS: 113 trials (262 treatment arms) that randomised 6750 patients (mean age 47.9 years; 59% women) with major depressive disorder or bipolar depression met the inclusion criteria. The most studied treatment comparisons were high frequency left rTMS and tDCS versus sham therapy, whereas recent treatments remain understudied. The quality of the evidence was typically of low or unclear risk of bias (94 out of 113 trials, 83%) and the precision of summary estimates for treatment effect varied considerably. In network meta-analysis, 10 out of 18 treatment strategies were associated with higher response compared with sham therapy: bitemporal ECT (summary odds ratio 8.91, 95% confidence interval 2.57 to 30.91), high dose right unilateral ECT (7.27, 1.90 to 27.78), priming transcranial magnetic stimulation (6.02, 2.21 to 16.38), magnetic seizure therapy (5.55, 1.06 to 28.99), bilateral rTMS (4.92, 2.93 to 8.25), bilateral theta burst stimulation (4.44, 1.47 to 13.41), low frequency right rTMS (3.65, 2.13 to 6.24), intermittent theta burst stimulation (3.20, 1.45 to 7.08), high frequency left rTMS (3.17, 2.29 to 4.37), and tDCS (2.65, 1.55 to 4.55). Network meta-analytic estimates of active interventions contrasted with another active treatment indicated that bitemporal ECT and high dose right unilateral ECT were associated with increased response. All treatment strategies were at least as acceptable as sham therapy. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide evidence for the consideration of non-surgical brain stimulation techniques as alternative or add-on treatments for adults with major depressive episodes. These findings also highlight important research priorities in the specialty of brain stimulation, such as the need for further well designed randomised controlled trials comparing novel treatments, and sham controlled trials investigating magnetic seizure therapy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6435996
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64359962019-04-08 Comparative efficacy and acceptability of non-surgical brain stimulation for the acute treatment of major depressive episodes in adults: systematic review and network meta-analysis Mutz, Julian Vipulananthan, Vijeinika Carter, Ben Hurlemann, René Fu, Cynthia H Y Young, Allan H BMJ Research OBJECTIVE: To estimate the comparative clinical efficacy and acceptability of non-surgical brain stimulation for the acute treatment of major depressive episodes in adults. DESIGN: Systematic review with pairwise and network meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Electronic search of Embase, PubMed/Medline, and PsycINFO up to 8 May 2018, supplemented by manual searches of bibliographies of several reviews (published between 2009 and 2018) and included trials. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Clinical trials with random allocation to electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), transcranial magnetic stimulation (repetitive (rTMS), accelerated, priming, deep, and synchronised), theta burst stimulation, magnetic seizure therapy, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), or sham therapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were response (efficacy) and all cause discontinuation (discontinuation of treatment for any reason) (acceptability), presented as odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Remission and continuous depression severity scores after treatment were also examined. RESULTS: 113 trials (262 treatment arms) that randomised 6750 patients (mean age 47.9 years; 59% women) with major depressive disorder or bipolar depression met the inclusion criteria. The most studied treatment comparisons were high frequency left rTMS and tDCS versus sham therapy, whereas recent treatments remain understudied. The quality of the evidence was typically of low or unclear risk of bias (94 out of 113 trials, 83%) and the precision of summary estimates for treatment effect varied considerably. In network meta-analysis, 10 out of 18 treatment strategies were associated with higher response compared with sham therapy: bitemporal ECT (summary odds ratio 8.91, 95% confidence interval 2.57 to 30.91), high dose right unilateral ECT (7.27, 1.90 to 27.78), priming transcranial magnetic stimulation (6.02, 2.21 to 16.38), magnetic seizure therapy (5.55, 1.06 to 28.99), bilateral rTMS (4.92, 2.93 to 8.25), bilateral theta burst stimulation (4.44, 1.47 to 13.41), low frequency right rTMS (3.65, 2.13 to 6.24), intermittent theta burst stimulation (3.20, 1.45 to 7.08), high frequency left rTMS (3.17, 2.29 to 4.37), and tDCS (2.65, 1.55 to 4.55). Network meta-analytic estimates of active interventions contrasted with another active treatment indicated that bitemporal ECT and high dose right unilateral ECT were associated with increased response. All treatment strategies were at least as acceptable as sham therapy. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide evidence for the consideration of non-surgical brain stimulation techniques as alternative or add-on treatments for adults with major depressive episodes. These findings also highlight important research priorities in the specialty of brain stimulation, such as the need for further well designed randomised controlled trials comparing novel treatments, and sham controlled trials investigating magnetic seizure therapy. BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2019-03-27 /pmc/articles/PMC6435996/ /pubmed/30917990 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l1079 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Research
Mutz, Julian
Vipulananthan, Vijeinika
Carter, Ben
Hurlemann, René
Fu, Cynthia H Y
Young, Allan H
Comparative efficacy and acceptability of non-surgical brain stimulation for the acute treatment of major depressive episodes in adults: systematic review and network meta-analysis
title Comparative efficacy and acceptability of non-surgical brain stimulation for the acute treatment of major depressive episodes in adults: systematic review and network meta-analysis
title_full Comparative efficacy and acceptability of non-surgical brain stimulation for the acute treatment of major depressive episodes in adults: systematic review and network meta-analysis
title_fullStr Comparative efficacy and acceptability of non-surgical brain stimulation for the acute treatment of major depressive episodes in adults: systematic review and network meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Comparative efficacy and acceptability of non-surgical brain stimulation for the acute treatment of major depressive episodes in adults: systematic review and network meta-analysis
title_short Comparative efficacy and acceptability of non-surgical brain stimulation for the acute treatment of major depressive episodes in adults: systematic review and network meta-analysis
title_sort comparative efficacy and acceptability of non-surgical brain stimulation for the acute treatment of major depressive episodes in adults: systematic review and network meta-analysis
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6435996/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30917990
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l1079
work_keys_str_mv AT mutzjulian comparativeefficacyandacceptabilityofnonsurgicalbrainstimulationfortheacutetreatmentofmajordepressiveepisodesinadultssystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT vipulananthanvijeinika comparativeefficacyandacceptabilityofnonsurgicalbrainstimulationfortheacutetreatmentofmajordepressiveepisodesinadultssystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT carterben comparativeefficacyandacceptabilityofnonsurgicalbrainstimulationfortheacutetreatmentofmajordepressiveepisodesinadultssystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT hurlemannrene comparativeefficacyandacceptabilityofnonsurgicalbrainstimulationfortheacutetreatmentofmajordepressiveepisodesinadultssystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT fucynthiahy comparativeefficacyandacceptabilityofnonsurgicalbrainstimulationfortheacutetreatmentofmajordepressiveepisodesinadultssystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT youngallanh comparativeefficacyandacceptabilityofnonsurgicalbrainstimulationfortheacutetreatmentofmajordepressiveepisodesinadultssystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis