Bifrontal active and sham rTMS in treatment-resistant unipolar major depression

2018 ◽  
Vol 72 (8) ◽  
pp. 586-592 ◽  
Author(s):  
Minna Valkonen-Korhonen ◽  
Hanna Leinola ◽  
Mervi Könönen ◽  
Eini Niskanen ◽  
Maija Purhonen ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Vol 44 ◽  
pp. S40-S41
Author(s):  
I.A. Alexandru ◽  
I.E. Ghenoiu ◽  
R.E. Manolache ◽  
R.A. Lecu ◽  
M.I. Gionea

2013 ◽  
Vol 25 (6) ◽  
pp. 334-341 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tina Gooren ◽  
Peter Schlattmann ◽  
Peter Neu

ObjectiveEven though cognitive deficits are well recognised in schizophrenia and depression, direct comparisons between the disorders are scarce in literature. This study aims to assess specificity and degree of cognitive deficits in inpatients with acute schizophrenia and unipolar major depression.MethodsA neuropsychological test battery was administered to 76 schizophrenic patients, 102 patients with unipolar major depression and 85 healthy controls (HCs), assessing verbal learning [Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT)], processing speed (Trail Making Test), verbal fluency and visual memory (Wechsler Memory Scale-Revised test).ResultsBoth patient groups were significantly impaired compared with HCs with regard to all test outcomes. The schizophrenia group (SG) performed significantly worse in the Wechsler Memory Scale and verbal fluency than the depression group (DG). The DG reached significantly lower scores than the SG in the RAVLT delayed recall subtest. No significant group difference between SG and DG was found for the Trail Making Test and the RAVLT direct recall trails.ConclusionOur results indicate that cognitive impairment is present in both disorders. Schizophrenic patients performed worse than patients with unipolar depression in only two of the administered tests. Differences in cognitive performance between the groups are not as general as often assumed. Therefore, during the acute phase of illness, a diagnostic classification on the grounds of the patients’ neurocognitive performance has to be done with caution.


2007 ◽  
Vol 98 (3) ◽  
pp. 267-270 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mehmet Yucel Agargun ◽  
Lutfullah Besiroglu ◽  
Ali Savas Cilli ◽  
Mustafa Gulec ◽  
Adem Aydin ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 207 ◽  
pp. 110-113 ◽  
Author(s):  
Danielle Lefebvre ◽  
Lisa Marie Langevin ◽  
Natalia Jaworska ◽  
Ashley D. Harris ◽  
R. Marc Lebel ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 74 (1) ◽  
pp. 48-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Baojuan Li ◽  
Li Liu ◽  
Karl J. Friston ◽  
Hui Shen ◽  
Lubin Wang ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (597) ◽  
pp. eabe1376
Author(s):  
Peter Nagele ◽  
Ben J. Palanca ◽  
Britt Gott ◽  
Frank Brown ◽  
Linda Barnes ◽  
...  

Nitrous oxide at 50% inhaled concentration has been shown to improve depressive symptoms in patients with treatment-resistant major depression (TRMD). Whether a lower concentration of 25% nitrous oxide provides similar efficacy and persistence of antidepressant effects while reducing the risk of adverse side effects is unknown. In this phase 2 clinical trial (NCT03283670), 24 patients with severe TRMD were randomly assigned in a crossover fashion to three treatments consisting of a single 1-hour inhalation with (i) 50% nitrous oxide, (ii) 25% nitrous oxide, or (iii) placebo (air/oxygen). The primary outcome was the change on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-21). Whereas nitrous oxide significantly improved depressive symptoms versus placebo (P = 0.01), there was no difference between 25 and 50% nitrous oxide (P = 0.58). The estimated differences between 25% and placebo were −0.75 points on the HDRS-21 at 2 hours (P = 0.73), −1.41 points at 24 hours (P = 0.52), −4.35 points at week 1 (P = 0.05), and −5.19 points at week 2 (P = 0.02), and the estimated differences between 50% and placebo were −0.87 points at 2 hours (P = 0.69), −1.93 points at 24 hours (P = 0.37), −2.44 points at week 1 (P = 0.25), and −7.00 points at week 2 (P = 0.001). Adverse events declined substantially with dose (P < 0.001). These results suggest that 25% nitrous oxide has comparable efficacy to 50% nitrous oxide in improving TRMD but with a markedly lower rate of adverse effects.


2015 ◽  
Vol 78 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Nagele ◽  
Andreas Duma ◽  
Michael Kopec ◽  
Marie Anne Gebara ◽  
Alireza Parsoei ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document