Mischoulon David, De Jong Marasha F, Vitolo Ottavio V, Cusin Cristina, Dording Christina M, Yeung Albert S, Durham Kelley, Parkin Susannah R, Fava Maurizio, Dougherty Darin D
Depression Clinical and Research Program, Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Depression Clinical and Research Program, Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
J Psychiatr Res. 2015 Nov;70:98-105. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2015.08.016. Epub 2015 Aug 29.
We examined efficacy and safety of one specific cranial electrical stimulator (CES) device at a fixed setting in subjects with treatment-resistant major depressive disorder (MDD). Thirty subjects (57% female, mean age 48.1 ± 12.3 years) with MDD and inadequate response to standard antidepressants were randomized to 3 weeks of treatment with CES (15/500/15,000 Hz, symmetrical rectangular biphasic current of 1-4 mAmp, 40 V) or sham CES (device off) for 20 min, 5 days per week. The primary outcome measure was improvement in the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D-17). Adverse effects (AEs) were assessed using the Patient Related Inventory of Side Effects (PRISE). Completion rates were 88% for CES, 100% for sham. Both treatment groups demonstrated improvement of about 3-5 points in HAM-D-17 scores (p < 0.05 for both), and no significant differences were observed between groups. Remission rates were 12% for CES, and 15% for sham, a nonsignificant difference. CES was deemed safe, with good tolerability; poor concentration and malaise were the only distressing AEs that differed significantly between CES and sham (p = 0.019 and p = 0.043, respectively). Limitations include a small sample and lack of an active comparator therapy. Although both treatment groups improved significantly, this CES at the setting chosen did not separate from sham in this sample. Thus we cannot rule out that the benefit from this setting used in this particular form of CES was due to placebo effects. Since this form of CES has other settings, future studies should test these settings and compare it against other CES devices. Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT01325532.
我们在治疗抵抗性重度抑郁症(MDD)患者中,以固定设置检查了一种特定的经颅电刺激器(CES)设备的疗效和安全性。30名患有MDD且对标准抗抑郁药反应不佳的受试者(57%为女性,平均年龄48.1±12.3岁)被随机分为两组,一组接受3周的CES治疗(15/500/15,000赫兹,1 - 4毫安、40伏的对称矩形双相电流),另一组接受假CES治疗(设备关闭),每周5天,每次20分钟。主要结局指标是17项汉密尔顿抑郁量表(HAM - D - 17)评分的改善情况。使用患者相关副作用清单(PRISE)评估不良反应(AE)。CES组的完成率为88%,假CES组为100%。两个治疗组的HAM - D - 17评分均改善了约3 - 5分(两组均p < 0.05),组间未观察到显著差异。CES组的缓解率为12%,假CES组为15%,差异无统计学意义。CES被认为是安全的,耐受性良好;注意力不集中和不适是CES组与假CES组之间仅有的有显著差异的令人困扰的AE(分别为p = 0.019和p = 0.043)。局限性包括样本量小以及缺乏活性对照治疗。尽管两个治疗组均有显著改善,但在此样本中,所选择设置的这种CES与假CES并无差异。因此,我们不能排除这种特定形式的CES所使用的此设置带来的益处是由于安慰剂效应。由于这种形式的CES还有其他设置,未来研究应测试这些设置,并将其与其他CES设备进行比较。Clinicaltrials.gov标识符:NCT01325532。