Suppr超能文献

强迫症患者的周期性与连续性深部脑刺激:一项随机对照试验。

Cyclic versus continuous deep brain stimulation in patients with obsessive compulsive disorder: A randomized controlled trial.

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Department of Psychiatry, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

出版信息

Brain Stimul. 2023 Jan-Feb;16(1):82-87. doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2023.01.1664. Epub 2023 Jan 19.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the ventral anterior limb of the internal capsule (vALIC) is effective for refractory obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), but patients typically require high stimulation voltages and DBS comes with a risk for adverse events (AE).

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to advance DBS for OCD by optimizing energy efficiency and minimize adverse events using a cyclic form of stimulation METHODS: This double blind, randomized crossover trial compares 2 weeks of continuous versus cyclic DBS (0.1 s ON, 0.2 s OFF) in 16 patients with OCD. We compared OCD symptoms (Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale, Y-BOCS), Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D), Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A), AEs, battery life, cognitive performance and quality of life.

RESULTS

Average Y-BOCS scores at baseline increased significantly with 5.5 points (p = 0.006) in the cyclic condition. Average HAM-D and HAM-A scores increased with 2.2 (p = 0.088) and 2.8 points (p = 0.018). The overall health scale of quality of life worsened during cyclic DBS (p = 0.044). Patients reported on average 3.3 AEs during continuous stimulation and 4.4 AEs during cyclic stimulation (p = 0.175), though stimulation-related AEs such as headache and concentration problems reduced during cyclic DBS. Battery usage during continuous DBS was 0.021 V per hour compared to 0.008 V per hour during cyclic DBS.

CONCLUSION

Though specific stimulation-related AEs improved, cyclic stimulation (0.1 s ON, 0.2 s OFF) comes with a high relapse risk in patients with DBS for OCD. Cyclic DBS is no alternative for standard DBS treatment, but applicable in case of debilitating AEs.

摘要

背景

内侧苍白球腹前肢深部脑刺激(vALIC-DBS)对难治性强迫症(OCD)有效,但患者通常需要高刺激电压,且 DBS 存在不良反应(AE)风险。

目的

本研究旨在通过优化能量效率并使用循环刺激的形式将 OCD 的 DBS 治疗向前推进,以最小化不良事件。

方法

这项双盲、随机交叉试验比较了 16 例 OCD 患者接受 2 周连续刺激与循环刺激(0.1 s ON,0.2 s OFF)的情况。我们比较了 OCD 症状(耶鲁-布朗强迫症量表,Y-BOCS)、汉密尔顿抑郁量表(HAM-D)、汉密尔顿焦虑量表(HAM-A)、AE、电池寿命、认知表现和生活质量。

结果

基线时,平均 Y-BOCS 评分在循环条件下显著增加了 5.5 分(p=0.006)。平均 HAM-D 和 HAM-A 评分分别增加了 2.2(p=0.088)和 2.8 分(p=0.018)。循环 DBS 期间整体健康量表的生活质量恶化(p=0.044)。在连续刺激期间,患者平均报告了 3.3 例 AE,而在循环刺激期间则报告了 4.4 例 AE(p=0.175),尽管在循环 DBS 期间头痛和注意力问题等与刺激相关的 AE 减少。连续 DBS 期间的电池使用量为 0.021 V/小时,而循环 DBS 期间为 0.008 V/小时。

结论

尽管特定的刺激相关 AE 有所改善,但 OCD 的 DBS 患者的循环刺激(0.1 s ON,0.2 s OFF)存在高复发风险。循环 DBS 不是标准 DBS 治疗的替代方法,但适用于致残性 AE 的情况。

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