Cargando…
Efficacy of Deep TMS with the H1 Coil for Anxious Depression
(1) Background: While the therapeutic efficacy of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) for major depressive disorder (MDD) is well established, less is known about the technique’s efficacy for treating comorbid anxiety. (2) Methods: Data were retrospectively analyzed from randomized controlled tr...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8879826/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35207288 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11041015 |
_version_ | 1784659003892039680 |
---|---|
author | Pell, Gaby S. Harmelech, Tal Zibman, Sam Roth, Yiftach Tendler, Aron Zangen, Abraham |
author_facet | Pell, Gaby S. Harmelech, Tal Zibman, Sam Roth, Yiftach Tendler, Aron Zangen, Abraham |
author_sort | Pell, Gaby S. |
collection | PubMed |
description | (1) Background: While the therapeutic efficacy of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) for major depressive disorder (MDD) is well established, less is known about the technique’s efficacy for treating comorbid anxiety. (2) Methods: Data were retrospectively analyzed from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that used Deep TMS with the H1 Coil for MDD treatment. The primary endpoint was the difference relative to sham treatment following 4 weeks of stimulation. The effect size was compared to literature values for superficial TMS and medication treatments. (3) Results: In the pivotal RCT, active Deep TMS compared with sham treatment showed significantly larger improvements in anxiety score (effect size = 0.34, p = 0.03 (FDR)) which were sustained until 16 weeks (effect size = 0.35, p = 0.04). The pooled effect size between all the RCTs was 0.55, which compares favorably to alternative treatments. A direct comparison to Figure-8 Coil treatment indicated that treatment with the H1 Coil was significantly more effective (p = 0.042). In contrast to previously reported studies using superficial TMS and medication for which anxiety has been shown to be a negative predictor of effectiveness, higher baseline anxiety was found to be predictive of successful outcome for the H1-Coil treatment. (4) Conclusions: Deep TMS is effective in treating comorbid anxiety in MDD and, unlike alternative treatments, the outcome does not appear to be adversely affected by high baseline anxiety levels. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8879826 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-88798262022-02-26 Efficacy of Deep TMS with the H1 Coil for Anxious Depression Pell, Gaby S. Harmelech, Tal Zibman, Sam Roth, Yiftach Tendler, Aron Zangen, Abraham J Clin Med Article (1) Background: While the therapeutic efficacy of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) for major depressive disorder (MDD) is well established, less is known about the technique’s efficacy for treating comorbid anxiety. (2) Methods: Data were retrospectively analyzed from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that used Deep TMS with the H1 Coil for MDD treatment. The primary endpoint was the difference relative to sham treatment following 4 weeks of stimulation. The effect size was compared to literature values for superficial TMS and medication treatments. (3) Results: In the pivotal RCT, active Deep TMS compared with sham treatment showed significantly larger improvements in anxiety score (effect size = 0.34, p = 0.03 (FDR)) which were sustained until 16 weeks (effect size = 0.35, p = 0.04). The pooled effect size between all the RCTs was 0.55, which compares favorably to alternative treatments. A direct comparison to Figure-8 Coil treatment indicated that treatment with the H1 Coil was significantly more effective (p = 0.042). In contrast to previously reported studies using superficial TMS and medication for which anxiety has been shown to be a negative predictor of effectiveness, higher baseline anxiety was found to be predictive of successful outcome for the H1-Coil treatment. (4) Conclusions: Deep TMS is effective in treating comorbid anxiety in MDD and, unlike alternative treatments, the outcome does not appear to be adversely affected by high baseline anxiety levels. MDPI 2022-02-15 /pmc/articles/PMC8879826/ /pubmed/35207288 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11041015 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Pell, Gaby S. Harmelech, Tal Zibman, Sam Roth, Yiftach Tendler, Aron Zangen, Abraham Efficacy of Deep TMS with the H1 Coil for Anxious Depression |
title | Efficacy of Deep TMS with the H1 Coil for Anxious Depression |
title_full | Efficacy of Deep TMS with the H1 Coil for Anxious Depression |
title_fullStr | Efficacy of Deep TMS with the H1 Coil for Anxious Depression |
title_full_unstemmed | Efficacy of Deep TMS with the H1 Coil for Anxious Depression |
title_short | Efficacy of Deep TMS with the H1 Coil for Anxious Depression |
title_sort | efficacy of deep tms with the h1 coil for anxious depression |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8879826/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35207288 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11041015 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pellgabys efficacyofdeeptmswiththeh1coilforanxiousdepression AT harmelechtal efficacyofdeeptmswiththeh1coilforanxiousdepression AT zibmansam efficacyofdeeptmswiththeh1coilforanxiousdepression AT rothyiftach efficacyofdeeptmswiththeh1coilforanxiousdepression AT tendleraron efficacyofdeeptmswiththeh1coilforanxiousdepression AT zangenabraham efficacyofdeeptmswiththeh1coilforanxiousdepression |