Social Genetic and Developmental Psychiatry Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London SE5 8AF, UK
South London and Maudsley Foundation NHS Trust, London, UK.
BMJ. 2019 Mar 27;364:l1079. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l1079.
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the comparative clinical efficacy and acceptability of non-surgical brain stimulation for the acute treatment of major depressive episodes in adults. DESIGN: Systematic review with pairwise and network meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Electronic search of Embase, PubMed/Medline, and PsycINFO up to 8 May 2018, supplemented by manual searches of bibliographies of several reviews (published between 2009 and 2018) and included trials. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Clinical trials with random allocation to electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), transcranial magnetic stimulation (repetitive (rTMS), accelerated, priming, deep, and synchronised), theta burst stimulation, magnetic seizure therapy, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), or sham therapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were response (efficacy) and all cause discontinuation (discontinuation of treatment for any reason) (acceptability), presented as odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Remission and continuous depression severity scores after treatment were also examined. RESULTS: 113 trials (262 treatment arms) that randomised 6750 patients (mean age 47.9 years; 59% women) with major depressive disorder or bipolar depression met the inclusion criteria. The most studied treatment comparisons were high frequency left rTMS and tDCS versus sham therapy, whereas recent treatments remain understudied. The quality of the evidence was typically of low or unclear risk of bias (94 out of 113 trials, 83%) and the precision of summary estimates for treatment effect varied considerably. In network meta-analysis, 10 out of 18 treatment strategies were associated with higher response compared with sham therapy: bitemporal ECT (summary odds ratio 8.91, 95% confidence interval 2.57 to 30.91), high dose right unilateral ECT (7.27, 1.90 to 27.78), priming transcranial magnetic stimulation (6.02, 2.21 to 16.38), magnetic seizure therapy (5.55, 1.06 to 28.99), bilateral rTMS (4.92, 2.93 to 8.25), bilateral theta burst stimulation (4.44, 1.47 to 13.41), low frequency right rTMS (3.65, 2.13 to 6.24), intermittent theta burst stimulation (3.20, 1.45 to 7.08), high frequency left rTMS (3.17, 2.29 to 4.37), and tDCS (2.65, 1.55 to 4.55). Network meta-analytic estimates of active interventions contrasted with another active treatment indicated that bitemporal ECT and high dose right unilateral ECT were associated with increased response. All treatment strategies were at least as acceptable as sham therapy. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide evidence for the consideration of non-surgical brain stimulation techniques as alternative or add-on treatments for adults with major depressive episodes. These findings also highlight important research priorities in the specialty of brain stimulation, such as the need for further well designed randomised controlled trials comparing novel treatments, and sham controlled trials investigating magnetic seizure therapy.
目的:评估非手术性脑刺激治疗成人重度抑郁症急性发作的临床疗效和可接受性。
设计:系统评价,包括两两比较和网络荟萃分析。
资料来源:2018 年 5 月 8 日前,电子检索 Embase、PubMed/Medline 和 PsycINFO,并辅以对几篇综述(发表于 2009 年至 2018 年)的参考文献手动检索和纳入试验。
入选研究的标准:随机分配至电惊厥疗法(ECT)、经颅磁刺激(重复(rTMS)、加速、启动、深部和同步)、θ爆发刺激、磁惊厥疗法、经颅直流电刺激(tDCS)或假刺激的临床试验。
主要结局指标:主要结局指标为反应(疗效)和全因停药(因任何原因停止治疗)(可接受性),以优势比(OR)和 95%置信区间(CI)表示。治疗后缓解和连续抑郁严重程度评分也进行了检查。
结果:纳入了 113 项试验(262 个治疗臂),共纳入了 6750 例患有重度抑郁症或双相抑郁的患者(平均年龄 47.9 岁;59%为女性)。最受研究的治疗比较是高频左 rTMS 和 tDCS 与假刺激治疗,而最近的治疗方法仍研究不足。证据质量通常为低或不清楚的偏倚风险(94 项试验,83%),治疗效果汇总估计的精度差异很大。在网络荟萃分析中,18 种治疗策略中有 10 种与假刺激治疗相比,反应更高:双侧 ECT(汇总 OR 8.91,95%CI 2.57 至 30.91)、高剂量右侧单侧 ECT(7.27,1.90 至 27.78)、启动经颅磁刺激(6.02,2.21 至 16.38)、磁惊厥疗法(5.55,1.06 至 28.99)、双侧 rTMS(4.92,2.93 至 8.25)、双侧θ爆发刺激(4.44,1.47 至 13.41)、低频右 rTMS(3.65,2.13 至 6.24)、间歇性θ爆发刺激(3.20,1.45 至 7.08)、高频左 rTMS(3.17,2.29 至 4.37)和 tDCS(2.65,1.55 至 4.55)。与另一种活性治疗比较的活性干预措施的网络荟萃分析估计表明,双侧 ECT 和高剂量右侧单侧 ECT 与增加反应有关。所有治疗策略的可接受性至少与假刺激治疗相当。
结论:这些发现为考虑非手术性脑刺激技术作为成人重度抑郁症发作的替代或附加治疗提供了证据。这些发现还突出了脑刺激专业领域的重要研究重点,例如需要进一步设计良好的随机对照试验比较新的治疗方法,以及假对照试验研究磁惊厥疗法。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018-3-16
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018-4-13
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021-4-19
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020-1-9
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-12-22
Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2016-3-1
Mol Psychiatry. 2025-7-16
Lancet Reg Health Am. 2025-6-23
Am J Psychiatry. 2025-6-1