scholarly journals Recovering from depression with repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS): a systematic review and meta-analysis of preclinical studies

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Luisa De Risio ◽  
Marta Borgi ◽  
Mauro Pettorruso ◽  
Andrea Miuli ◽  
Angela Maria Ottomana ◽  
...  

AbstractRepetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has gained growing interest for the treatment of major depression (MDD) and treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Most knowledge on rTMS comes from human studies as preclinical application has been problematic. However, recent optimization of rTMS in animal models has laid the foundations for improved translational studies. Preclinical studies have the potential to help identify optimal stimulation protocols and shed light on new neurobiological-based rationales for rTMS use. To assess existing evidence regarding rTMS effects on depressive-like symptoms in rodent models, we conducted a comprehensive literature search in accordance with PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019157549). In addition, we conducted a meta-analysis to determine rTMS efficacy, performing subgroup analyses to examine the impact of different experimental models and neuromodulation parameters. Assessment of the depressive-like phenotype was quite homogeneous whilst rTMS parameters among the 23 included studies varied considerably. Most studies used a stress-induced model. Overall, results show a largely beneficial effect of active rTMS compared to sham stimulation, as reflected in the statistically significant recovery of both helplessness (SDM 1.34 [1.02;1.66]) and anhedonic (SDM 1.87 [1.02;2.72]) profiles. Improvement of the depressive-like phenotype was obtained in all included models and independently of rTMS frequency. Nonetheless, these results have limited predictive value for TRD patients as only antidepressant-sensitive models were used. Extending rTMS studies to other MDD models, corresponding to distinct endophenotypes, and to TRD models is therefore crucial to test rTMS efficacy and to develop cost-effective protocols, with the potential of yielding faster clinical responses in MDD and TRD.

2021 ◽  
pp. 000486742110687
Author(s):  
Paul B Fitzgerald ◽  
Shane Gill ◽  
Michael Breakspear ◽  
Jayashri Kulkarni ◽  
Leo Chen ◽  
...  

Following on from the publication of the Royal Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry Mood Disorder Clinical Practice Guidelines (2020) and criticisms of how these aberrantly addressed repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment of depression, questions have continued to be raised in the journal about this treatment by a small group of authors, whose views we contend do not reflect the broad acceptance of this treatment nationally and internationally. In fact, the evidence supporting the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment in depression is unambiguous and substantial, consisting of an extensive series of clinical trials supported by multiple meta-analyses, network meta-analysis and umbrella reviews. Importantly, the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment in depression has also been subject to a series of health economic analyses. These indicate that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation is a cost-effective therapy and have been used in some jurisdictions, including Australia, in support of public funding. An argument has been made that offering repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment may delay potentially effective pharmacotherapy. In fact, there is considerably greater danger of the opposite happening. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation is as, if not more effective, than antidepressant medication after two unsuccessful medication trials and should be a consideration for all patients under these circumstances where available. There is no meaningful ongoing debate about the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment in depression – it is a safe, effective and cost-effective treatment.


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hyune June Lee ◽  
Sung Min Kim ◽  
Ji Yean Kwon

Abstract Background Peripartum depression is a common disorder with very high potential hazards for both the patients and their babies. The typical treatment options include antidepressants and electroconvulsive therapy. However, these treatments do not ensure the safety of the fetus. Recently, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation has emerged as a promising treatment for neuropathies as well as depression. Nevertheless, many studies excluded pregnant women. This systematic review was conducted to confirm whether repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation was a suitable treatment option for peripartum depression. Methods We performed a systematic review that followed the PRISMA guidelines. We searched for studies in the MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and Cochrane library databases published until the end of September 2020. Eleven studies were selected for the systematic review, and five studies were selected for quantitative synthesis. Data analysis was conducted using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis 3 software. The effect size was analyzed using the standardized mean difference, and the 95% confidence interval (CI) was determined by the generic inverse variance estimation method. Results The therapeutic effect size of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for peripartum depression was 1.394 (95% CI: 0.944–1.843), and the sensitivity analysis effect size was 1.074 (95% CI: 0.689–1.459), indicating a significant effect. The side effect size of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for peripartum depression was 0.346 (95% CI: 0.214–0.506), a meaningful result. There were no severe side effects to the mothers or fetuses. Conclusions From various perspectives, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation can be considered an alternative treatment to treat peripartum depression to avoid exposure of fetuses to drugs and the severe side effects of electroconvulsive therapy. Further research is required to increase confidence in the results.


2021 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cong Fu ◽  
Aikedan Aisikaer ◽  
Zhijuan Chen ◽  
Qing Yu ◽  
Jianzhong Yin ◽  
...  

A core feature of drug-resistant epilepsy is hyperexcitability in the motor cortex, and low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a suitable treatment for seizures. However, the antiepileptic effect causing network reorganization has rarely been studied. Here, we assessed the impact of rTMS on functional network connectivity (FNC) in resting functional networks (RSNs) and their relation to treatment response. Fourteen patients with medically intractable epilepsy received inhibitive rTMS with a figure-of-eight coil over the vertex for 10 days spread across two weeks. We designed a 6-week follow-up phase divided into four time points to investigate FNC and rTMS-induced timing-dependent plasticity, such as seizure frequency and abnormal interictal discharges on electroencephalography (EEG). For psychiatric comorbidities, the Hamilton Depression Scale (HAM-D) and the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A) were applied to measure depression and anxiety before and after rTMS. FNC was also compared to that of a cohort of 17 healthy control subjects. The after-effects of rTMS included all subjects that achieved the significant decrease rate of more than 50% in interictal epileptiform discharges and seizure frequency, 12 (14) patients with the reduction rate above 50% compared to the baseline, as well as emotional improvements in depression and anxiety (p < 0.05). In the analysis of RSNs, we found a higher synchronization between the sensorimotor network (SMN) and posterior default-mode network (pDMN) in epileptic patients than in healthy controls. In contrast to pre-rTMS, the results demonstrated a weaker FNC between the anterior DMN (aDMN) and SMN after rTMS, while the FNC between the aDMN and dorsal attention network (DAN) was greater (p < 0.05, FDR corrected). Importantly, the depressive score was anticorrelated with the FNC of the aDMN-SMN (r = −0.67, p = 0.0022), which was markedly different in the good and bad response groups treated with rTMS (p = 0.0115). Based on the vertex suppression by rTMS, it is possible to achieve temporary clinical efficacy by modulating network reorganization in the DMN and SMN for patients with refractory epilepsy.


2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (5) ◽  
pp. e100051
Author(s):  
Huiru Cui ◽  
Lijuan Jiang ◽  
Yanyan Wei ◽  
Wei Li ◽  
Hui Li ◽  
...  

BackgroundPharmacological and conventional non-pharmacological treatments are only moderately effective in treating generalised anxiety disorder (GAD). Recently, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has attracted interest because of its potential therapeutic value.AimTo investigate the efficacy and safety of rTMS treatment for GAD.MethodsLiterature studies published in English or Chinese were screened in 10 electronic databases up to 5 December 2018. The included studies’ bias risk was assessed using Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool. Meta-analysis was performed to compute the standardised mean difference (SMD) and risk ratio (RR) along with its 95% CIs through using RevMan V.5.3. Heterogeneity was inspected by I2 and the χ2 test. We performed subgroup analysis and meta-regression to investigate heterogeneity. We used funnel plot to assess publication bias. We used the GRADE approach to assess the whole quality of evidence.ResultsTwenty-one studies, with a total sample size of 1481, were analysed. The risk of bias in most studies included is moderate, the majority of which are lacking of blinding methods of treatment allocation. The treatment had beneficial effects in the rTMS group compared with the control group in mean anxiety score (SMD=−0.68; 95% CI −0.89 to −0.46). None of the 21 studies included here reported severe adverse events. As for dropout rates, there are no statistically significant differences between the two groups (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.82) or adverse events (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.18). No particular influence on the heterogeneity of any variable was observed. The risk of publication bias was low. According to the GRADE approach, the evidence levels of primary outcome (treatment effects) and secondary outcomes (acceptability and safety) were rated as ‘medium’.ConclusionThe use of rTMS combined with medication treatment may have a significant positive anti-anxiety effect on patients with GAD. However, we should interpret the results cautiously due to the relatively high heterogeneity of the meta-analysis. Future high-quality clinical trials are needed to confirm our results.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document