scholarly journals Transcranial Direct-Current Stimulation (tDCS) Versus Venlafaxine ER In The Treatment Of Depression: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Single-Center Study With Open-Label, Follow-Up

2019 ◽  
Vol Volume 15 ◽  
pp. 3003-3014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Bares ◽  
Martin Brunovsky ◽  
Pavla Stopkova ◽  
Martin Hejzlar ◽  
Tomas Novak
2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S112-S112 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leandro Valiengo ◽  
Mauricio Serpa ◽  
Helio Elkis ◽  
Martinus van de Bilt ◽  
Acioly Lacerda ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Schizophrenia is a severe mental illness presenting a substantial, increasing burden. Its negative symptoms include flattened affect, loss of interest, and emo- tional withdrawal and are associated with poor functional outcomes. Most antipsychotic drugs are not effective for such symptoms and present important adverse effects3 and low tolerability. v Nonpharmacological interventions are also limited. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a noninvasive neuromodulatory technique that presents low costs, portability, ease of use, and no serious adverse effects. The technique injects weak, direct currents via scalp electrodes. A current fraction penetrates the brain, increasing or decreasing the neuronal excitability of regions near the anode or the cathode, respectively. Mimicking rTMS studies, tDCS trials have used anodal stimulation over the left PFC aiming to ameliorate negative symptoms. In a seminal study, Brunelin et al used a frontotemporoparietal montage in 30 patients with schizophrenia and demonstrated large effect sizes for improvement of negative symptoms and auditory hallucinations (AHs). Recently, we confirmed that active tDCS is more effective than sham tDCS for the negative symptoms of schizophrenia in a randomized, sham-controlled clinical trial with 100 patients. However, the studies showed tDCS efficacy only during the acute phase of the treatment of the negative symptoms of schizophrenia. In fact, as to understand tDCS’ role in the therapeutic arsenal of schizophrenia, it is crucial to assess its efficacy during the continuation treatment. We performed a 24- week follow-up study to assess the relapse of patients presenting a clinical response after acute tDCS treatment. We also explored whether baseline clinical and demographic characteristics were predictors of relapse. Finally, we report the results of patients from the open-label, crossover phase of the study. Methods The follow-up phase was the open-label in which all responders (>20% negative PANSS improvement or negative PANSS < 20) who had previously received active-tDCS were enrolled to a 24-week, follow-up phase in which a maximum of 9 tDCS sessions were performed – every other week for 3 months and, thereafter, once a month for the subsequent 3 months – sessions would be interrupted earlier whether the subject relapsed. TDCS was applied at 2mA/30-min, with the anode over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and the cathode over the tempoparietal junction. Relapse was the outcome measure. Results We had 20 responder in the clinical trial to tDCS and more 12 out 29 in the cross-over phase (who were sham and entered in an open-label exactly as the original clinical trial). Of this 32, 27 accepted to participate in the follow-up phase. The survival rate per Kaplan–Meier analysis was 61%. Patients with treatment ultra-resistant presented lower 24-week survival rate as compared to nonrefractory patients (58% vs. 67%), but without statistical difference between groups(P < .5). Equivalents dosages use of haloperidol, clozapine use, number of hospitalizations or length of the schizophrenia were a predictor of relapse. TDCS was well tolerated and with few side effects Discussion Patients after using tDCS for negative symptoms of schizophrenia presents a low rate of relapse when compared the use of tDCS for major depression. tDCS can be an alternative to the treatment of negative symptoms of schizophrenia at long-term.


CNS Spectrums ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 347-354 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernardo Dell'Osso ◽  
Cristina Dobrea ◽  
Chiara Arici ◽  
Beatrice Benatti ◽  
Roberta Ferrucci ◽  
...  

ObjectivesTranscranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive neurostimulation technique that has received increasing interest in the area of mood disorders over the last several years. While acute, double-blind, sham-controlled studies have already reported positive findings in terms of efficacy and safety for tDCS, follow-up data are lacking. This need prompted the present follow-up study, which assesses post-acute effects of tDCS (no maintenance stimulation was performed), in the mid-term, in a sample of major depressives.MethodsAfter completing an acute, open trial of tDCS, 23 outpatients with either major depressive disorder or bipolar disorder entered a naturalistic follow-up (T1) with clinical evaluations at one week (T2), 1 month (T3), and 3 months (T4). A quantitative analysis of Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D), Montgomery–Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total scores, through repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) (T1–T4) and paired t-test for comparing specific time points (T1–T2, T2–T3, and T3–T4), was performed. In addition, a qualitative analysis on the basis of treatment response and remission (HAM-D) was performed.ResultsEven though a progressive reduction of follow-up completers was observed from T2 to T4 (95.6% at T2, 65.2% at T3, and 47.8% at T4), the antidepressant effects of acute tDCS persisted over 3 months in almost half of the sample. Of note, no post-acute side effects emerged during the follow-up observation. The most frequent causes of drop-out from this study included major modifications in therapeutic regimen (30%) and poor adherence to follow-up visits (17%).ConclusionsIn this mid-term, open, follow-up study, tDCS showed mixed results. Further controlled studies are urgently needed to assess its effects beyond the acute phase.


2015 ◽  
Vol 95 (3) ◽  
pp. 337-349 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernadette T. Gillick ◽  
Tim Feyma ◽  
Jeremiah Menk ◽  
Michelle Usset ◽  
Amy Vaith ◽  
...  

Background Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a form of noninvasive brain stimulation that has shown improved adult stroke outcomes. Applying tDCS in children with congenital hemiparesis has not yet been explored. Objective The primary objective of this study was to explore the safety and feasibility of single-session tDCS through an adverse events profile and symptom assessment within a double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled preliminary study in children with congenital hemiparesis. A secondary objective was to assess the stability of hand and cognitive function. Design A double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled pretest/posttest/follow-up study was conducted. Setting The study was conducted in a university pediatric research laboratory. Participants Thirteen children, ages 7 to 18 years, with congenital hemiparesis participated. Measurements Adverse events/safety assessment and hand function were measured. Intervention Participants were randomly assigned to either an intervention group or a control group, with safety and functional assessments at pretest, at posttest on the same day, and at a 1-week follow-up session. An intervention of 10 minutes of 0.7 mA tDCS was applied to bilateral primary motor cortices. The tDCS intervention was considered safe if there was no individual decline of 25% or group decline of 2 standard deviations for motor evoked potentials (MEPs) and behavioral data and no report of adverse events. Results No major adverse events were found, including no seizures. Two participants did not complete the study due to lack of MEP and discomfort. For the 11 participants who completed the study, group differences in MEPs and behavioral data did not exceed 2 standard deviations in those who received the tDCS (n=5) and those in the control group (n=6). The study was completed without the need for stopping per medical monitor and biostatisticial analysis. Limitations A limitation of the study was the small sample size, with data available for 11 participants. Conclusions Based on the results of this study, tDCS appears to be safe, feasible, and well tolerated in most children with hemiparesis. Future investigations of serial sessions of tDCS in conjunction with rehabilitation in pediatric hemiparesis are indicated to explore the benefit of a synergistic approach to improving hand function.


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clarice Martins Ferreira ◽  
Carolina Dias de Carvalho ◽  
Ruth Gomes ◽  
Erickson Duarte Bonifácio de Assis ◽  
Suellen Marinho Andrade

Introduction: Although transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and mirror therapy (MT) have benefits in combating chronic pain, there is still no evidence of the effects of the simultaneous application of these techniques in patients with neuropathic pain. This study aims to assess the efficacy of tDCS paired with MT in neuropathic pain after brachial plexus injury.Methods: In a sham controlled, double-blind, parallel-group design, 16 patients were randomized to receive active or sham tDCS administered during mirror therapy. Each patient received 12 treatment sessions, 30 min each, during a period of 4 weeks over M1 contralateral to the side of the injury. Outcome variables were evaluated at baseline and post-treatment using the McGill questionnaire, Brief Pain Inventory, and Medical Outcomes Study 36–Item Short-Form Health Survey. Long-term effects of treatment were evaluated at a 3-month follow-up.Results: An improvement in pain relief and quality of life were observed in both groups (p ≤ 0.05). However, active tDCS and mirror therapy resulted in greater improvements after the endpoint (p ≤ 0.02). No statistically significant differences in the outcome measures were identified among the groups at follow-up (p ≥ 0.12). A significant relationship was found between baseline pain intensity and outcome measures (p ≤ 0.04). Moreover, the results showed that state anxiety is closely linked to post-treatment pain relief (p ≤ 0.05).Conclusion: Active tDCS combined with mirror therapy has a short-term effect of pain relief, however, levels of pain and anxiety at the baseline should be considered.Clinical Trial Registration:www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT04385030.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ellana Welsby ◽  
Michael Ridding ◽  
Susan Hillier ◽  
Brenton Hordacre

BACKGROUND Stroke can have devastating consequences for an individual’s quality of life. Interventions capable of enhancing response to therapy would be highly valuable to the field of neurological rehabilitation. One approach is to use noninvasive brain stimulation techniques, such as transcranial direct current stimulation, to induce a neuroplastic response. When delivered in combination with rehabilitation exercises, there is some evidence that transcranial direct current stimulation is beneficial. However, responses to stimulation are highly variable. Therefore biomarkers predictive of response to stimulation would be valuable to help select appropriate people for this potentially beneficial treatment. OBJECTIVE The objective of this study is to investigate connectivity of the stimulation target, the ipsilesional motor cortex, as a biomarker predictive of response to anodal transcranial direct current stimulation in people with stroke. METHODS This study is a double blind, randomized controlled trial (RCT), with two parallel groups. A total of 68 participants with first ever ischemic stroke with motor impairment will undertake a two week (14 session) treatment for upper limb function (Graded Repetitive Arm Supplementary Program; GRASP). Participants will be randomized 2:1 to active:sham treatment groups. Those in the active treatment group will receive anodal transcranial direct current stimulation to the ipsilesional motor cortex at the start of each GRASP session. Those allocated to the sham treatment group will receive sham transcranial direct current stimulation. Behavioural assessments of upper limb function will be performed at baseline, post treatment, 1 month follow-up and 3 months follow-up. Neurophysiological assessments will include magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), electroencephalography (EEG) and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and will be performed at baseline, post treatment, 1 month follow-up (EEG and TMS only) and 3 months follow-up (EEG and TMS only). RESULTS Participants will be recruited between March 2018 and December 2018, with experimental testing concluding in March 2019. CONCLUSIONS Identifying a biomarker predictive of response to transcranial direct current stimulation would greatly assist clinical utility of this novel treatment approach. CLINICALTRIAL Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12618000443291; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?ACTRN=12618000443291 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/737QOXXxt) REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER RR1-10.2196/10848


F1000Research ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 317 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arash Bayat ◽  
Miguel Mayo ◽  
Samaneh Rashidi ◽  
Nader Saki ◽  
Ali Yadollahpour

Background: Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) is reportedly a potential treatment option for chronic tinnitus. The main drawbacks of previous studies are short term follow up and focusing on the efficacy of single session tDCS. This study aims to investigate the therapeutic efficacy, adverse effects (AEs) and tolerability of repeated sessions of bilateral tDCS over auditory cortex (AC) on tinnitus symptoms Methods: This will be a double-blinded randomized placebo controlled parallel trial on patients (n=90) with intractable chronic tinnitus (> 2 years) randomly divided into three groups of anodal, cathodal, and sham tDCS. In the sham treatment, after 30 sec the device will be turned OFF without informing the patients. The tDCS protocol consists of 10 sessions (daily  20 min session; 2 mA current for 5 consecutive days per week and 2 consecutive weeks) applied through 35 cm2 electrodes. The primary outcome is tinnitus handicap inventory (THI) which will be assessed pre- and post-intervention and at one month follow-up. The secondary outcomes are tinnitus loudness and distress to be assessed using a visual analogue scale (VAS) pre-intervention, and immediately, one hour, one week, and one month after last stimulation. The AEs and tolerability of patients will be evaluated after each session using a customized questionnaire. Possible interactions between the disease features and treatment response will be evaluated.   Discussion: To our knowledge this is the first study to investigate the effects of repeated sessions of tDCS on chronic tinnitus symptoms with one month follow-up. In addition, the AEs, and tolerability of patients will be studied. In addition, the possible interactions between the disease specific features including the hearing loss, laterality, type of tinnitus, and treatment response will be evaluated.   Trial registration: The study has been registered as a clinical trial in Iranian Registry of Clinical Trial (IRCT2016110124635N6) on the 01/06/2017.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document