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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |