Mogg A, Pluck G, Eranti S V, Landau S, Purvis R, Brown R G, Curtis V, Howard R, Philpot M, McLoughlin D M
Section of Old Age Psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London, London, UK.
Psychol Med. 2008 Mar;38(3):323-33. doi: 10.1017/S0033291707001663. Epub 2007 Oct 15.
Effectiveness of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for major depression is unclear. The authors performed a randomized controlled trial comparing real and sham adjunctive rTMS with 4-month follow-up.
Fifty-nine patients with major depression were randomly assigned to a 10-day course of either real (n=29) or sham (n=30) rTMS of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). Primary outcome measures were the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) and proportions of patients meeting criteria for response (50% reduction in HAMD) and remission (HAMD8) after treatment. Secondary outcomes included mood self-ratings on Beck Depression Inventory-II and visual analogue mood scales, Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) score, and both self-reported and observer-rated cognitive changes. Patients had 6-week and 4-month follow-ups.
Overall, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) scores were modestly reduced in both groups but with no significant groupxtime interaction (p=0.09) or group main effect (p=0.85); the mean difference in HAMD change scores was -0.3 (95% CI -3.4 to 2.8). At end-of-treatment time-point, 32% of the real group were responders compared with 10% of the sham group (p=0.06); 25% of the real group met the remission criterion compared with 10% of the sham group (p=0.2); the mean difference in HAMD change scores was 2.9 (95% CI -0.7 to 6.5). There were no significant differences between the two groups on any secondary outcome measures. Blinding was difficult to maintain for both patients and raters.
Adjunctive rTMS of the left DLPFC could not be shown to be more effective than sham rTMS for treating depression.
重复经颅磁刺激(rTMS)治疗重度抑郁症的有效性尚不清楚。作者进行了一项随机对照试验,比较了真实和假辅助rTMS,并进行了4个月的随访。
59例重度抑郁症患者被随机分配接受为期10天的左侧背外侧前额叶皮质(DLPFC)真实rTMS(n=29)或假rTMS(n=30)治疗。主要结局指标为17项汉密尔顿抑郁量表(HAMD)以及治疗后达到反应标准(HAMD降低50%)和缓解标准(HAMD≤8)的患者比例。次要结局包括贝克抑郁量表-II和视觉模拟情绪量表上的情绪自评、简明精神病评定量表(BPRS)评分以及自我报告和观察者评定的认知变化。患者进行了6周和4个月的随访。
总体而言,两组的汉密尔顿抑郁量表(HAMD)评分均有适度降低,但组×时间交互作用不显著(p=0.09),组主效应也不显著(p=0.85);HAMD变化评分的平均差异为-0.3(95%CI -3.4至2.8)。在治疗结束时间点,真实组32%的患者为反应者,而假刺激组为10%(p=0.06);真实组25%的患者达到缓解标准,假刺激组为10%(p=0.2);HAMD变化评分的平均差异为2.9(95%CI -0.7至6.5)。两组在任何次要结局指标上均无显著差异。患者和评估者都难以维持盲法。
对于治疗抑郁症,左侧DLPFC的辅助rTMS并未显示出比假rTMS更有效。