Zheng Wei, Xiang Yu-Tao, Tang Yi-Lang, Xiang Ying-Qiang, Li Xian-Bin, Cao Xiao-Lan, Guo Tong, Liu Zheng-Rong, Chiu Helen F K, Ungvari Gabor S, de Leon Jose
From the *The Affiliated Brain Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou Huiai Hospital, Guangzhou; †The National Clinical Research Center for Mental Disorders, China and Center of Depression, Beijing Institute for Brain Disorders, Beijing Anding Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing; ‡Unit of Psychiatry, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Macau, Macao SAR, China; §Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA; ∥Shenzhen Key Laboratory for Psychological Healthcare and Shenzhen Institute of Mental Health, Shenzhen Kangning Hospital and Shenzhen Mental Health Center, Shenzhen; ¶Department of Psychiatry, the Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR; #Mental Hospital of Guangzhou Civil Administration, Guangzhou, China; **The University of Notre Dame Australia/Marian Centre; ††School of Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia; ‡‡University of Kentucky, Mental Health Research Center at Eastern State Hospital, Lexington, KY; §§Psychiatry and Neurosciences Research Group (CTS-549), Institute of Neurosciences, University of Granada, Granada; and ∥∥Biomedical Research Centre in Mental Health Net (CIBERSAM), Santiago Apostol Hospital, University of the Basque Country, Vitoria, Spain.
J ECT. 2016 Aug 3. doi: 10.1097/YCT.0000000000000344.
The aim of the study was to examine published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for the efficacy and safety of adjunctive electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) when combined with antipsychotics (APs) versus AP therapy for schizophrenia and related disorders during the acute phase.
Two evaluators independently selected studies, extracted data, and conducted quality assessment and data synthesis. Standardized and weighted mean differences (SMD/WMD), risk ratio (RR) ±95% confidence intervals (CIs), number needed to treat (NNT), and number needed to harm (NNH) were calculated.
Twenty-two RCTs (n = 1365, age = 36.9 years, male = 53%), including double-blind (8 RCTs) and rater-masked (14 RCTs) designs, were identified and analyzed. Adjunctive ECT was superior to AP therapy regarding (1) symptomatic improvement at last-observation endpoint (standardized mean difference, -0.67; P < 0.00001; I = 79%); (2) study-defined response (RR = 1.81, I = 0%, P < 0.00001, NNT = 4) and remission (RR = 2.05, I = 0%, P = 0.0004, NNT = 13); and (3) positive, negative, and general psychopathology subscores (weighted mean difference, -4.01 to -1.79; P = 0.005-0.0001). Results were similar in all preplanned subgroup analyses including Chinese (11 RCTs) versus non-Chinese (7 RCTs) origin, those with a Jadad score 3 or higher (12 RCTs) versus lower than 3 (6 RCTs), and those with clozapine (5 RCTs) versus those with non-clozapine treatments (13 RCTs). Compared with AP therapy, adjunctive ECT AP was significantly associated with more headache (RR = 2.72, P = 0.04, NNH = 5) and memory impairment (RR = 14.24, P = 0.01, NNH = 7).
Adjunctive ECT seems to be an effective and safe option for schizophrenia and related disorders during acute phases but was associated with transient memory impairment and headaches.
本研究旨在探讨已发表的随机对照试验(RCT),以评估在急性期,辅助性电休克治疗(ECT)联合抗精神病药物(AP)与单纯AP治疗相比,用于治疗精神分裂症及相关疾病时的疗效和安全性。
两名评估者独立选择研究、提取数据,并进行质量评估和数据合成。计算标准化和加权平均差(SMD/WMD)、风险比(RR)±95%置信区间(CI)、治疗所需人数(NNT)和伤害所需人数(NNH)。
共识别并分析了22项随机对照试验(n = 1365,年龄 = 36.9岁,男性 = 53%),包括双盲试验(8项)和评分者盲法试验(14项)。辅助性ECT在以下方面优于AP治疗:(1)末次观察终点时的症状改善(标准化平均差,-0.67;P < 0.00001;I² = 79%);(2)研究定义的缓解(RR = 1.81,I² = 0%,P < 0.00001,NNT = 4)和痊愈(RR = 2.05,I² = 0%,P = 0.0004,NNT = 13);以及(3)阳性、阴性和一般精神病理学亚评分(加权平均差,-4.01至-1.79;P = 0.005 - 0.0001)。在所有预先计划的亚组分析中结果相似,包括中国(11项试验)与非中国(7项试验)来源、Jadad评分3分或更高(12项试验)与低于3分(6项试验),以及使用氯氮平(5项试验)与未使用氯氮平治疗(13项试验)。与AP治疗相比,辅助性ECT联合AP显著增加了头痛(RR = 2.72,P = 0.04,NNH = 5)和记忆损害(RR = 14.24,P = 0.01,NNH = 7)的发生。
辅助性ECT似乎是急性期精神分裂症及相关疾病的一种有效且安全的选择,但与短暂的记忆损害和头痛有关。