EEG Synchronized TMS for Individualized Therapy in Major Depressive Disorder

2011 ◽  
Vol 26 (S2) ◽  
pp. 1144-1144
Author(s):  
Y. Jin ◽  
J. Phillips ◽  
Yueqin Huang ◽  
Steven Heurta
Keyword(s):  
Major Depressive Disorder ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Depressive Disorder ◽  
Active Treatment ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Stimulus Frequency ◽  
List Type ◽  
Major Depressive ◽  
Double Blind

IntroductionEfficacy of conventional repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in major depressive disorder (MDD) is limited. The authors report here on an alternative treatment using low energy synchronized TMS (sTMS) at the intrinsic frequency of subjects’ alpha electroencephalogram (EEG).ObjectivesEstablish efficacy and safety profile of sTMS in MDD.Aim(1)Examine the clinical effectiveness of sTMS.(2)Identify adverse effects associated with sTMS.MethodsFifty-two MDD subjects with 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD17) scores >17 were enrolled into a randomized, sham controlled, double-blind trial. Current medication remained unchanged during the trial. Depressive symptoms were evaluated by HAMD17 administered weekly.EEGs were recorded at baseline to determine the stimulus frequency and at week 4 to evaluate the physiological effect. sTMS was delivered through three 6000-G cylindrical neodymium magnets synchronously rotating at a rate equal to the subject's intrinsic alpha frequency.ResultsForty-five subjects completed at least 1 week of treatment and were evaluable. Those who received active treatment had superior clinical response to sham (t = 2.54, P = 0.01), where 55.2% in the active treatment group were clinical responders versus 12.5% in sham (X2 = 7.82, P = 0.005). No significant side effects were reported. The clinical improvement was correlated with the degree of EEG improvement (r = .46, P = 0.009).ConclusionsA therapeutic effect in MDD subjects can be achieved through administration of sTMS at the subject's alpha EEG frequency. Because of minimal side effects, this appears to be a safe and effective treatment option.

scholarly journals Theta burst stimulation for the acute treatment of major depressive disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey D. Voigt ◽  
Andrew F. Leuchter ◽  
Linda L. Carpenter
Keyword(s):  
Major Depressive Disorder ◽  
Depressive Disorder ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
High Frequency Stimulation ◽  
Theta Burst Stimulation ◽  
Burst Stimulation ◽  
Major Depressive ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Theta Burst

AbstractPatients with major depressive disorder (MDD) may be refractory to or have contraindications that preclude treatment with antidepressant pharmacotherapies. Alternative therapies such as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) continue to evolve, and include theta burst stimulation (TBS), which has advantages over conventional rTMS. The aim of this study was to identify and meta-analyze efficacy data from all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating TBS as a treatment for MDD. Published reports of RCTs (January 1, 2010 to October 23, 2020) were identified via systematic searches in computerized databases, followed by review of individual reports for inclusion. Inclusion criteria included primary diagnosis of MDD ≥ 1 week duration of therapy with ≥10 sessions, and treatment with any form of TBS. The Cochrane GRADE methodology and PRISMA criteria were used for evaluation of individual trials. Data from ten RCTs were included, representing 667 patients. Of these, 8 RCTs compared TBS to sham treatment and one compared TBS to standard rTMS (i.e., high frequency stimulation over left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex [HFL]). Quality of evidence assessment yielded high confidence in the finding of TBS being superior to sham on response measured by the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HRSD) (RR = 2.4; 95% CI: 1.27 to 4.55; P = 0.007; I2 = 40%). Comparison of HRSD response rates for TBS versus rTMS produced no statistically significant difference (RR = 1.02; 95% CI: 0.85 to 1.23; P = 0.80; I2 = 0%). The incidence of adverse events between TBS and rTMS was not statistically different. The findings of a positive effect of TBS vs. sham, and noninferiority of TBS vs. standard HFL rTMS support the continued development of TBS to treat depression.

scholarly journals Impact of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) on Theory of Mind and Executive Function in Major Depressive Disorder and Its Correlation with Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor (BDNF): A Randomized, Double-Blind, Sham-Controlled Trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 765
Author(s):  
Jie Tong ◽  
Jie Zhang ◽  
Ying Jin ◽  
Weiqing Liu ◽  
Hao Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Major Depressive Disorder ◽  
Executive Function ◽  
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Theory Of Mind ◽  
Depressive Disorder ◽  
Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Major Depressive ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Perseverative Errors

Background: Studies have implicated hypofrontality in the pathogenesis of impaired theory of mind (ToM) and executive function (EF) in major depressive disorder (MDD). These symptoms are usually resistant to treatment. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has been shown to reverse hypofrontality. Moreover, BDNF is an effective biomarker of antidepressant effects, but there have been very few studies on the correlation between BDNF and rTMS. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of 20 sessions of a 10 Hz unilateral rTMS intervention over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) in improving ToM and EF in patients with MDD and its correlation with BDNF. Methods: A total of 120 MDD patients were enrolled in this randomized, sham-controlled, double-blind trial. Each participant received 20 sessions of rTMS at 10 Hz frequency through the active or the sham coil over 4 weeks. ToM was assessed with the facial emotion identification test (FEIT) and hinting task (HT). EF was assessed with the Wisconsin card sorting test (WCST). BDNF assessments were carried out at baseline and 2-, 4-, 12-, and 24-week follow-ups. Results: The improvement in the ToM (FEIT, HT) in the active rTMS group was significantly different from that in the sham rTMS group (F = 18.09, p < 0.001; F = 5.02, p = 0.026). There were significant differences in the WCST (categories completed, response errors, response perseverative errors, non-response perseverative errors) after logarithmic transformation at different time points in the active rTMS group (F = 14.71, p < 0.001; F = 5.99, p = 0.046; F = 8.90, p = 0.031; F = 2.31, p = 0.048). However, there was no significant difference in log transformed BDNF concentration between the two groups (t = 0.07 to t = 1.29, p > 0.05). BDNF was negatively correlated with WCST categories completed at the 24th week (r = −0.258, p = 0.046). Conclusions: The results show that rTMS may improve the ToM and EF of patients with MDD and there was no significant correlation with serum BDNF concentration. RTMS can not only be used for treatment of patients with MDD but also has a positive effect on ToM and EF.

Propofol Anaesthesia in Electroconvulsive Therapy

1994 ◽  
Vol 165 (4) ◽  
pp. 506-509 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher F. Fear ◽  
Carl S. Littlejohns ◽  
Eryl Rouse ◽  
Paul McQuail
Keyword(s):  
Major Depressive Disorder ◽  
Depressive Disorder ◽  
Electroconvulsive Therapy ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Induction Agent ◽  
Double Blind Study ◽  
Major Depressive ◽  
Seizure Duration ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Induction Agents

BackgroundThe induction agent propofol is known to reduce electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) seizure duration. It is assumed that outcome from depression is adversely affected by this agent. This study compares propofol and methohexitone as induction agents for ECT.MethodIn a prospective, randomised, double-blind study 20 subjects with major depressive disorder (DSM-III-R criteria) received propofol or methohexitone anaesthesia. The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and Beck Depression Inventory were used to assess depression before therapy, at every third treatment, and at the end of therapy. Seizure duration was measured using the cuff technique.ResultsMean seizure durations (P < 0.01) and mean total seizure duration (P < 0.01) were shorter in the propofol group. There was no difference in outcome.ConclusionsUse of propofol may not adversely affect outcome from depression and it is not necessarily contraindicated as an induction agent for ECT. Our results should be interpreted cautiously, and larger studies are needed.

scholarly journals Treatment of major depressive disorder with bilateral theta burst stimulation: study protocol for a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter trial (TBS-D)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Plewnia ◽  
Bettina Brendel ◽  
Tobias Schwippel ◽  
Vanessa Nieratschker ◽  
Thomas Ethofer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Major Depressive Disorder ◽  
Depressive Disorder ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Treatment Time ◽  
Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Theta Burst Stimulation ◽  
Burst Stimulation ◽  
Major Depressive ◽  
Resting Motor Threshold ◽  
Theta Burst

AbstractRepetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) is currently evolving as an effective and safe therapeutic tool in the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). However, already established rTMS treatment paradigms are rather time-consuming. With theta burst stimulation (TBS), a patterned form of rTMS, treatment time can be substantially reduced. Pilot studies and a randomized controlled trial (RCT) demonstrate non-inferiority of TBS to 10 Hz rTMS and support a wider use in MDD. Still, data from placebo-controlled multicenter RCTs are lacking. In this placebo-controlled multicenter study, 236 patients with MDD will be randomized to either intermittent TBS (iTBS) to the left and continuous TBS (cTBS) to the right dlPFC or bilateral sham stimulation (1:1 ratio). The treatment will be performed with 80% resting motor threshold intensity over six consecutive weeks (30 sessions). The primary outcome is the treatment response rate (Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale reduction ≥ 50%). The aim of the study is to confirm the superiority of active bilateral TBS compared to placebo treatment. In two satellite studies, we intend to identify possible MRI-based and (epi-)genetic predictors of responsiveness to TBS therapy. Positive results will support the clinical use of bilateral TBS as an advantageous, efficient, and well-tolerated treatment and pave the way for further individualization of MDD therapy.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04392947).

scholarly journals Efficacy of levomilnacipran extended-release in major depressive disorder: pooled analysis of 5 double-blind, placebo-controlled trials

CNS Spectrums ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 148-156 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stuart A. Montgomery ◽  
Carl P. Gommoll ◽  
Changzheng Chen ◽  
William M. Greenberg
Keyword(s):  
Major Depressive Disorder ◽  
Depressive Disorder ◽  
Extended Release ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Pooled Analysis ◽  
Major Depressive ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Madrs Score ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Remission Rates

Introduction/ObjectivePost hoc analyses were conducted to evaluate the efficacy of levomilnacipran extended-release (ER) in subgroups of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD).MethodsData were pooled from 5 completed Phase II/III studies. Patients were categorized by sex, age, MDD duration, recurrence of MDD, current episode duration, number of prior episodes, and baseline Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score. Efficacy was evaluated by MADRS least squares (LS) mean change from baseline, response (MADRS improvement ≥50%), and remission (MADRS ≤10).ResultsIn the pooled population, treatment with levomilnacipran ER versus placebo resulted in greater improvement in MADRS score (−15.8 versus −12.9; LS mean difference, −2.9; P < .001) and higher response rates (44.7% versus 34.5%; P < .001). Comparable treatment effects were found in most subgroups. Remission rates in the overall population were higher for levomilnacipran ER versus placebo (27.7% versus 21.5%; P < .05); notably high remission rates were seen in patients with baseline MADRS score < 30 (48.8% versus 28.9%; P < .001).DiscussionClinically meaningful improvements in depressive symptoms were found across subgroups, including statistically significant outcomes for both response and remission.ConclusionLevomilnacipran ER was efficacious across a wide range of MDD patients, including men and women, ages 18–78, with varying histories and symptom severity.

Escitalopram Versus SNRI Antidepressants in the Acute Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder: Integrative Analysis of Four Double-Blind, Randomized Clinical Trials

CNS Spectrums ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 14 (6) ◽  
pp. 326-333 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan G. Kornstein ◽  
Dayong Li ◽  
Yongcai Mao ◽  
Sara Larsson ◽  
Henning F. Andersen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Major Depressive Disorder ◽  
Depressive Disorder ◽  
Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Severe Depression ◽  
Major Depressive ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Madrs Score ◽  
Treatment Difference

AbstractIntroduction: Recent data suggest that escitalopram may be more effective in severe depression than other selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors.Methods: Individual patient data from four randomized, double-blind comparative trials of escitalopram versus a serotonin/norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) (two trials with duloxetine and two with venlafaxine extended release) in outpatients (18–85 years of age) with moderate-to-severe major depressive disorder were pooled. The primary efficacy parameter in all four trials was mean change in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score.Results: Significantly fewer escitalopram (82/524) than SNRI (114/527) patients prematurely withdrew from treatment due to all causes (15.6% vs. 21.6%, Fisher Exact: P=.014) and adverse events (5.3% vs. 12.0%, Fisher Exact: P <.0001). Mean reduction in MADRS score from baseline to Week 8 was significantly greater for the escitalopram group versus the SNRI group using the last observation carried forward (LOCF) approach [mean treatment difference at Week 8 of 1.7 points (P <.01)]. Similar results were observed in the severely depressed (baseline MADRS score ≥30) patient subset (mean treatment difference at Week 8 of 2.9 points [P <.001, LOCF]). Observed cases analyses yielded no significant differences in efficacy parameters.Conclusion: This pooled analysis indicates that escitalopram is at least as effective as the SNRIs (venlafaxine XR and duloxetine), even in severe depression, and escitalopram treatment was better tolerated.

scholarly journals Sexual Function during Bupropion or Paroxetine Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder

2006 ◽  
Vol 51 (4) ◽  
pp. 234-242 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sidney H Kennedy ◽  
Kari A Fulton ◽  
R Michael Bagby ◽  
Andrea L Greene ◽  
Nicole L Cohen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Major Depressive Disorder ◽  
Depressive Disorder ◽  
Sexual Function ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Major Depressive ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Over Time

Objective: The primary objective was to evaluate sexual function (SF) separately in men and women with major depressive disorder (MDD) before and during treatment with bupropion sustained release (SR) or paroxetine. The secondary objectives involved a comparative evaluation of the Sex Effects Scale (Sex FX) and the Investigator-Rated Sexual Desire and Functioning Scale (IRSD-F), as well as a comparison of antidepressant outcomes and an examination of the relation between level of depression and SF over time. Method: There were 141 patients (68 women and 73 men) who met DSM-IV criteria for a current major depressive episode. They were randomly assigned to receive bupropion SR (150 to 300 mg daily) or paroxetine (20 to 40 mg daily) under double-blind trial conditions. Patients were assessed at baseline and at 2, 4, 6, and 8 weeks with the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS17), Sex FX, and IRSD-F. Results: Prior to treatment, women reported significantly lower SF on both the Sex FX and IRSD-F scales, compared with men. During treatment, there were no significant drug differences on measures of SF over time for women; however, men who were treated with paroxetine reported a worsening of SF, whereas bupropion SR did not significantly alter SF. Both bupropion SR and paroxetine produced clinically and statistically significant reductions in HDRS17 scores as well as comparable rates of response and remission. There was a statistically significant correlation between the 2 measures of SF at all visits. There was also a significant inverse relation between depression and SF in women, but not in men, irrespective of drug. Conclusion: According to the Sex FX scale, a significant difference in antidepressant-related sexual dysfunction was detected in men, but not women, during treatment with bupropion SR or paroxetine.

Effectiveness of mirtazapine as add-on to paroxetine v. paroxetine or mirtazapine monotherapy in patients with major depressive disorder with early non-response to paroxetine: a two-phase, multicentre, randomized, double-blind clinical trial

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Le Xiao ◽  
Xuequan Zhu ◽  
Amy Gillespie ◽  
Yuan Feng ◽  
Jingjing Zhou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Major Depressive Disorder ◽  
Depressive Disorder ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Antidepressant Treatment ◽  
Additional Treatment ◽  
Combination Group ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Major Depressive ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Early Improvement

Abstract Background This study aimed to examine the efficacy of combining paroxetine and mirtazapine v. switching to mirtazapine, for patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) who have had an insufficient response to SSRI monotherapy (paroxetine) after the first 2 weeks of treatment. Methods This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, three-arm study recruited participants from five hospitals in China. Eligible participants were aged 18–60 years with MDD of at least moderate severity. Participants received paroxetine during a 2-week open-label phase and patients who had not achieved early improvement were randomized to paroxetine, mirtazapine or paroxetine combined with mirtazapine for 6 weeks. The primary outcome was improvement on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression 17-item (HAMD-17) scores 6 weeks after randomization. Results A total of 204 patients who showed early non-response to paroxetine monotherapy were randomly assigned to receive either mirtazapine and placebo (n = 68), paroxetine and placebo (n = 68) or mirtazapine and paroxetine (n = 68), with 164 patients completing the outcome assessment. At week 8, the least squares (LS) mean change of HAMD-17 scores did not significantly differ among the three groups, (12.98 points) in the mirtazapine group, (12.50 points) in the paroxetine group and (13.27 points) in the mirtazapine plus paroxetine combination group. Participants in the paroxetine monotherapy group were least likely to experience adverse effects. Conclusions After 8 weeks follow-up, paroxetine monotherapy, mirtazapine monotherapy and paroxetine/mirtazapine combination therapy were equally effective in non-improvers at 2 weeks. The results of this trial do not support a recommendation to routinely offer additional treatment or a switch in treatment strategies for MDD patients who do not show early improvement after 2 weeks of antidepressant treatment.

scholarly journals A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled 6-wk trial of the efficacy and tolerability of 5 mg vortioxetine in adults with major depressive disorder*

2012 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 313-321 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rakesh Jain ◽  
Atul R. Mahableshwarkar ◽  
Paula L. Jacobsen ◽  
Yinzhong Chen ◽  
Michael E. Thase
Keyword(s):  
Major Depressive Disorder ◽  
Depressive Disorder ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
P Value ◽  
Depression Symptoms ◽  
Major Depressive ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Efficacy Measure ◽  
Efficacy Measures ◽  
Hamilton Anxiety Scale

Abstract Vortioxetine (Lu AA21004) is a multi-modal antidepressant in clinical development for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). The current study evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of 5 mg vortioxetine compared to placebo after 6 wk of treatment in adults with MDD in an out-patient setting. Adults aged 18–75 yr, with a diagnosis of MDD and a baseline Montgomery–Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score ⩾30, were randomized to receive either 5 mg vortioxetine or placebo over 6 wk, followed by a 2-wk medication-free discontinuation period. The primary efficacy measure was change from baseline in Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD)-24 total score at week 6 compared to placebo. Additional measures included response and remission rates, Clinical Global Impression Scale – Improvement scores, HAMD-24 total score in subjects with baseline Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAMA) >19 and MADRS-S total score. Adverse events (AEs) were assessed throughout the study. A total of 600 adults were randomized. There were no significant differences in efficacy measures between subjects in the 5 mg vortioxetine and placebo groups at week 6. HAMD-24 total score in subjects with baseline HAMA >19 in the 5 mg vortioxetine group was improved at weeks 3–6 compared to the placebo group (nominal p value <0.05). The most common AEs for the vortioxetine and placebo groups were nausea (19.1 and 9.4%), headache (17.1 and 15.1%) and diarrhoea (11.4 and 7.0%), respectively. In this study of adults with MDD, 5 mg vortioxetine did not differ significantly from placebo in reducing depression symptoms after 6 wk of treatment.

scholarly journals Oxolipidomics profile in major depressive disorder: Comparing remitters and non-remitters to repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. e0246592
Author(s):  
Hannah Stirton ◽  
Benjamin P. Meek ◽  
Andrea L. Edel ◽  
Zahra Solati ◽  
Arun Surendran ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Oxidative Stress ◽  
Major Depressive Disorder ◽  
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Depressive Disorder ◽  
Treatment Response ◽  
Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Major Depressive ◽  
Predict Treatment Response

Background Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation [rTMS] is increasingly being used to treat Major Depressive Disorder [MDD]. Given that not all patients respond to rTMS, it would be clinically useful to have reliable biomarkers that predict treatment response. Oxidized phosphatidylcholine [OxPC] and some oxylipins are important plasma biomarkers of oxidative stress and inflammation. Not only is depression associated with oxidative stress, but rTMS has been shown to have anti-oxidative effects. Objectives To investigate whether plasma oxolipidomics profiles could predict treatment response in patients with treatment resistant MDD. Methods Fourty-eight patients undergoing rTMS treatment for MDD were recruited along with nine healthy control subjects. Plasma OxPCs and oxylipins were extracted and analyzed through high performance liquid chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry. Patients with a Hamilton Depression Rating Scale score [Ham-D] ≤7 post-treatment were defined as having entered remission. Results Fifty-seven OxPC and 32 oxylipin species were identified in our subjects. MDD patients who entered remission following rTMS had significantly higher pre-rTMS levels of total and fragmented OxPCs compared to non-remitters and controls [one-way ANOVA, p<0.05]. However, no significant changes in OxPC levels were found as a result of rTMS, regardless of treatment response [p>0.05]. No differences in plasma oxylipins were found between remitters and non-remitters at baseline. Conclusion Certain categories of OxPCs may be useful predictive biomarkers for response to rTMS treatment in MDD. Given that elevated oxidized lipids may indicate higher levels of oxidative stress and inflammation in the brain, patients with this phenotype of depression may be more receptive to rTMS treatment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document