Suppr超能文献

一项关于经颅直流电刺激对抑郁发作影响的系统评价和荟萃分析。

A systematic review and meta-analysis on the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation in depressive episodes.

机构信息

Laboratory of Neurosciences (LIM-27), Instituto Nacional de Biomarcadores em Neuropsiquiatria (INBioN), Department and Institute of Psychiatry, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.

Department of Internal Medicine, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.

出版信息

Depress Anxiety. 2020 Jul;37(7):594-608. doi: 10.1002/da.23004. Epub 2020 Feb 26.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has shown mixed results for depression treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of trials using tDCS to improve depressive symptoms.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed from the first date available to January 06, 2020 in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and additional sources. We included randomized, sham-controlled clinical trials (RCTs) enrolling participants with an acute depressive episode and compared the efficacy of active versus sham tDCS, including association with other interventions. The primary outcome was the Hedges' g for continuous depression scores; secondary outcomes included odds ratios (ORs) and number needed to treat (NNT) for response, remission, and acceptability. Random effects models were employed. Sources of heterogeneity were explored via metaregression, sensitivity analyses, subgroup analyses, and bias assessment.

RESULTS

We included 23 RCTs (25 datasets, 1,092 participants), most (57%) presenting a low risk of bias. Active tDCS was superior to sham regarding endpoint depression scores (k = 25, g = 0.46, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.22-0.70), and also achieved superior response (k = 18, 33.3% vs. 16.56%, OR = 2.28 [1.52-3.42], NNT = 6) and remission (k = 18, 19.12% vs. 9.78%, OR = 2.12 [1.42-3.16], NNT = 10.7) rates. Moreover, active tDCS was as acceptable as sham. No risk of publication bias was identified. Cumulative meta-analysis showed that effect sizes are basically unchanged since total sample reached 439 participants.

CONCLUSIONS

TDCS is modestly effective in treating depressive episodes. Further well-designed, large-scale RCTs are warranted.

摘要

背景

经颅直流电刺激(tDCS)在治疗抑郁症方面的效果参差不齐。

目的

对使用 tDCS 改善抑郁症状的试验进行系统评价和荟萃分析。

方法

从可获得的最早日期到 2020 年 1 月 6 日,在 PubMed、EMBASE、Cochrane 图书馆和其他来源中进行了系统评价。我们纳入了招募急性发作期抑郁症患者的随机、假对照临床试验(RCT),比较了 tDCS 与假刺激的疗效,包括与其他干预措施的联合应用。主要结局是连续抑郁评分的 Hedges' g;次要结局包括反应、缓解和可接受性的比值比(OR)和需要治疗的人数(NNT)。采用随机效应模型。通过荟萃回归、敏感性分析、亚组分析和偏倚评估来探索异质性的来源。

结果

我们纳入了 23 项 RCT(25 个数据集,1092 名参与者),其中大多数(57%)的偏倚风险较低。与假刺激相比,tDCS 治疗在终点抑郁评分方面更具优势(k=25,g=0.46,95%置信区间[CI]:0.22-0.70),并且在反应(k=18,33.3%比 16.56%,OR=2.28[1.52-3.42],NNT=6)和缓解(k=18,19.12%比 9.78%,OR=2.12[1.42-3.16],NNT=10.7)方面也有更好的效果。此外,tDCS 与假刺激一样具有可接受性。未发现发表偏倚的风险。累积荟萃分析表明,自总样本达到 439 名参与者以来,效应大小基本不变。

结论

tDCS 对治疗抑郁发作有一定的疗效。需要进一步进行设计良好、规模较大的 RCT。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验