Kellner Charles H, Knapp Rebecca G, Petrides Georgios, Rummans Teresa A, Husain Mustafa M, Rasmussen Keith, Mueller Martina, Bernstein Hilary J, O'Connor Kevin, Smith Glenn, Biggs Melanie, Bailine Samuel H, Malur Chitra, Yim Eunsil, McClintock Shawn, Sampson Shirlene, Fink Max
Department of Psychiatry, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey-New Jersey Medical School, 183 South Orange Avenue, Newark, NJ 07103, USA.
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2006 Dec;63(12):1337-44. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.63.12.1337.
Although electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) has been shown to be extremely effective for the acute treatment of major depression, it has never been systematically assessed as a strategy for relapse prevention.
To evaluate the comparative efficacy of continuation ECT (C-ECT) and the combination of lithium carbonate plus nortriptyline hydrochloride (C-Pharm) in the prevention of depressive relapse.
Multisite, randomized, parallel design, 6-month trial performed from 1997 to 2004.
Five academic medical centers and their outpatient psychiatry clinics.
Two hundred one patients with Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV-diagnosed unipolar depression who had remitted with a course of bilateral ECT.
Random assignment to 2 treatment groups receiving either C-ECT (10 treatments) or C-Pharm for 6 months.
Relapse of depression, compared between the C-ECT and C-Pharm groups.
In the C-ECT group, 37.1% experienced disease relapse, 46.1% continued to have disease remission at the study end, and 16.8% dropped out of the study. In the C-Pharm group, 31.6% experienced disease relapse, 46.3% continued to have disease remission, and 22.1% dropped out of the study. Both Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses indicated no statistically significant differences in overall survival curves and time to relapse for the groups. Mean +/- SD time to relapse for the C-ECT group was 9.1 +/- 7.0 weeks compared with 6.7 +/- 4.6 weeks for the C-Pharm group (P = .13). Both groups had relapse proportions significantly lower than a historical placebo control from a similarly designed study.
Both C-ECT and C-Pharm were shown to be superior to a historical placebo control, but both had limited efficacy, with more than half of patients either experiencing disease relapse or dropping out of the study. Even more effective strategies for relapse prevention in mood disorders are urgently needed.
尽管电休克疗法(ECT)已被证明对重度抑郁症的急性治疗极为有效,但从未作为预防复发的策略进行系统评估。
评估持续ECT(C-ECT)与碳酸锂加盐酸去甲替林联合治疗(C-Pharm)在预防抑郁复发方面的相对疗效。
1997年至2004年进行的多中心、随机、平行设计、为期6个月的试验。
五个学术医学中心及其门诊精神病诊所。
201例经《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第四版(DSM-IV)结构化临床访谈诊断为单相抑郁症且经双侧ECT疗程后病情缓解的患者。
随机分配至两个治疗组,分别接受C-ECT(10次治疗)或C-Pharm治疗6个月。
比较C-ECT组和C-Pharm组的抑郁复发情况。
在C-ECT组中,37.1%的患者病情复发,46.1%的患者在研究结束时持续病情缓解,16.8%的患者退出研究。在C-Pharm组中,31.6%的患者病情复发,46.3%的患者持续病情缓解,22.1%的患者退出研究。Kaplan-Meier分析和Cox比例风险回归分析均表明,两组的总生存曲线和复发时间无统计学显著差异。C-ECT组复发的平均时间(均值±标准差)为9.1±7.0周,而C-Pharm组为6.7±4.6周(P = 0.13)。两组的复发比例均显著低于一项设计相似的研究中的历史安慰剂对照组。
C-ECT和C-Pharm均被证明优于历史安慰剂对照组,但两者疗效有限,超过一半的患者病情复发或退出研究。迫切需要更有效的预防心境障碍复发的策略。