Kawashima Hirotsugu, Kobayashi Yuko, Suwa Taro, Murai Toshiya, Yoshioka Ryuichi
Department of Psychiatry, Toyooka Hospital, Toyooka, Hyogo, Japan.
Department of Neuropsychiatry, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.
Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2018 Feb 21;14:607-610. doi: 10.2147/NDT.S160093. eCollection 2018.
Inducing adequate therapeutic seizures during electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is sometimes difficult due to a high seizure threshold, even at the maximum stimulus charge. Previous studies have demonstrated that seizure threshold is lower in patients treated with right unilateral ultrabrief pulse (RUL-UBP) ECT than in those treated with bilateral or brief pulse (BL-BP) ECT. Therefore, switching to RUL-UBP ECT may be beneficial for patients in whom seizure induction is difficult with conventional ECT. In the present report, we discuss the case of a patient suffering from catatonic schizophrenia in whom BL-BP ECT failed to induce seizures at the maximum charge. However, RUL-UBP ECT successfully elicited therapeutic seizures and enabled the patient to achieve complete remission. This case illustrates that, along with other augmentation strategies, RUL-UBP ECT represents an alternative for seizure induction in clinical practice.
在电休克治疗(ECT)期间,即使在最大刺激电量下,由于癫痫发作阈值较高,诱导出足够的治疗性癫痫发作有时也很困难。先前的研究表明,接受右侧单侧超短脉冲(RUL-UBP)ECT治疗的患者的癫痫发作阈值低于接受双侧或短脉冲(BL-BP)ECT治疗的患者。因此,对于那些采用传统ECT难以诱导癫痫发作的患者,改用RUL-UBP ECT可能有益。在本报告中,我们讨论了一名患有紧张型精神分裂症的患者的病例,该患者在最大电量下接受BL-BP ECT未能诱导出癫痫发作。然而,RUL-UBP ECT成功诱发了治疗性癫痫发作,并使患者实现了完全缓解。该病例表明,与其他强化策略一起,RUL-UBP ECT是临床实践中诱导癫痫发作的一种替代方法。