Gu Xiaojing, Zheng Wei, Guo Tong, Ungvari Gabor S, Chiu Helen F K, Cao Xiaolan, D'Arcy Carl, Meng Xiangfei, Ning Yuping, Xiang Yutao
The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xinxiang Medical University, Henan Mental Hospital, Henan, China.
Guangzhou Brain Hospital (Guangzhou Huiai Hospital), Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou China.
Shanghai Arch Psychiatry. 2017 Feb 25;29(1):1-14. doi: 10.11919/j.issn.1002-0829.217003.
Agitation poses a significant challenge in the treatment of schizophrenia. Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is a fast, effective and safe treatment for a variety of psychiatric disorders, but no meta-analysis of ECT treatment for agitation in schizophrenia has yet been reported.
To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of ECT alone or ECT-antipsychotics (APs) combination for agitation in schizophrenia.
Systematic literature search of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was performed. Two independent evaluators selected studies, extracted data about outcomes and safety with available data, conducted quality assessment and data synthesis. The Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to judge the level of the overall evidence of main outcomes.
Seven RCTs from China, including ECT alone (4 RCTs with 5 treatment arms, n=240) and ECT-APs combination (3 RCTs, n=240), were identified. Participants in the studies were on average 34.3(4.5) years of age and lasted an average of 4.3(3.1) weeks of treatment duration. All 7 RCTs were non-blinded, and were rated as low quality based on Jadad scale. Meta-analysis of the pooled sample found no significant difference in the improvement of the agitation sub-score of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) when ECT alone (weighted mean difference=-0.90, (95% confidence interval (CI): -2.91, 1.11), p=0.38) or ECT-APs combination (WMD=-1.34, (95%CI: -4.07, 1.39), p=0.33) compared with APs monotherapy. However, ECT alone was superior to APs monotherapy regarding PANSS total score (WMD=-7.13, =0.004) and its excitement sub-score (WMD=-1.97, <0.0001) as well as the PANSS total score at 14 days (WMD=-7.13, =0%, =0.004) and its excitement sub-score at 7 and 14 days (WMD=-1.97 to -1.92, =0.002 to 0.0001) after ECT. The ECT-APs combination was superior to APs monotherapy with respect to the PANSS total score at treatment endpoint (WMD=-10.40, p=0.03) and 7 days (WMD=-5.01, =0.02). Headache (number-needed-to-harm (NNH)=3, 95%CI=2-4) was more frequent in the ECT alone group compared to AP monotherapy. According to the GRADE approach, the evidence levels of main outcomes were rated as ''very low'' (37.5%) and "low" (50%).
Pooling of the data based on 7 RCTs from China found no advantage of ECT alone or ECT-APs combination in the treatment of agitation related outcomes in schizophrenia patients. However, ECT alone or ECT-APs combination were associated with significant reduction in the PANSS total score. High-quality RCTs are needed to confirm the current interpretations.
激越在精神分裂症治疗中是一项重大挑战。电休克治疗(ECT)是治疗多种精神障碍的一种快速、有效且安全的方法,但尚未有关于ECT治疗精神分裂症激越的荟萃分析报道。
系统评价单独使用ECT或ECT与抗精神病药物(APs)联合治疗精神分裂症激越的疗效和安全性。
对随机对照试验(RCTs)进行系统文献检索。两名独立评估者筛选研究,提取有关结局和安全性的可用数据,进行质量评估和数据合成。采用推荐分级、评估、制定与评价(GRADE)方法判断主要结局总体证据的水平。
纳入了来自中国的7项RCTs,包括单独使用ECT(4项RCTs,5个治疗组,n = 240)和ECT与APs联合治疗(3项RCTs,n = 240)。研究中的参与者平均年龄为34.3(4.5)岁,平均治疗持续时间为4.3(3.1)周。所有7项RCTs均为非盲法,根据Jadad量表评定为低质量。对汇总样本的荟萃分析发现,单独使用ECT(加权均数差=-0.90,95%置信区间(CI):-2.91,1.11,p = 0.38)或ECT与APs联合治疗(WMD=-1.34,95%CI:-4.07,1.39,p = 0.33)与APs单药治疗相比,在阳性和阴性症状量表(PANSS)激越分量表改善方面无显著差异。然而,单独使用ECT在PANSS总分(WMD=-7.13,p = 0.004)及其兴奋分量表(WMD=-1.97,p < 0.0001)方面优于APs单药治疗,以及在ECT后14天的PANSS总分(WMD=-7.13,p = 0.004)及其在7天和14天的兴奋分量表(WMD=-1.97至-1.92,p = 0.002至0.0001)方面。ECT与APs联合治疗在治疗终点(WMD=-10.40,p = 0.03)和7天(WMD=-5.01,p = 0.02)时的PANSS总分方面优于APs单药治疗。与APs单药治疗相比,单独使用ECT组头痛(伤害所需人数(NNH)= 3,95%CI = 2 - 4)更常见。根据GRADE方法,主要结局的证据水平评定为“极低”(37.5%)和“低”(50%)。
基于来自中国的7项RCTs的数据汇总分析发现,单独使用ECT或ECT与APs联合治疗在精神分裂症患者激越相关结局的治疗中无优势。然而,单独使用ECT或ECT与APs联合治疗均与PANSS总分显著降低相关。需要高质量的RCTs来证实当前的解释。