Suppr超能文献

经颅磁刺激治疗抑郁症的疗效和安全性:随机对照试验的荟萃分析。

Efficacy and Safety of Theta Burst Versus Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for the Treatment of Depression: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

机构信息

Beijing Key Laboratory of Mental Disorders, National Clinical Research Center for Mental Disorders and National Center for Mental Disorders, Beijing Anding Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China; Advanced Innovation Center for Human Brain Protection, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.

Hebei Provincial Mental Health Center, Baoding, China; Hebei Key Laboratory of Major Mental and Behavioral Disorders, Baoding, China; The Sixth Clinical Medical College of Hebei University, Baoding, China.

出版信息

Neuromodulation. 2024 Jun;27(4):701-710. doi: 10.1016/j.neurom.2023.08.009. Epub 2023 Oct 12.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Theta burst stimulation (TBS) is more energy- and time-efficient than is standard repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). However, further studies are needed to analyze TBS therapy for its efficacy and safety compared with standard rTMS in treating depression. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare TBS therapy with standard rTMS treatment regarding their safety and therapeutic effect on individuals with depression.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Six data bases (Wanfang, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO) were searched from inception till December 20, 2022. Two independent reviewers selected potentially relevant studies on the basis of the inclusion criteria, extracted data, and evaluated the methodologic quality of the eligible trials using the modified ten-item Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Finally, ten comparable pairs of nine randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included for meta-analysis. Summary odds ratios (ORs) of the rates of response, remission, and adverse events were simultaneously calculated using quality-effects (QE) and random-effects (RE) models. Changes in depression scores associated with antidepressant effects were expressed using standardized mean differences simultaneously. This study was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42022376790).

RESULTS

Nine of the 602 RCTs, covering 1124 patients (616 who had TBS protocols applied vs 508 treated using standard rTMS), were included. Differences in response rates between the above two treatment modalities were not significant (OR = 1.01, 95% CI: 0.88-1.16, p = 0.44, I = 0%, RE model; OR = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.87-1.32, p = 0.44, I = 0%, QE model). Differences in adverse event rates between TBS and standard rTMS groups were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

TBS has similar efficacy and safety to standard rTMS for treating depression. Considering the short duration of daily stimulation sessions, this meta-analysis supports the continued development of TBS for treating depression.

摘要

目的

相比标准重复经颅磁刺激(rTMS),θ爆发刺激(TBS)在能量和时间效率方面更具优势。然而,仍需要进一步的研究来分析 TBS 疗法的疗效和安全性,以将其与治疗抑郁症的标准 rTMS 进行比较。本荟萃分析旨在比较 TBS 疗法与标准 rTMS 治疗在安全性和对抑郁症患者的治疗效果方面的差异。

材料和方法

从建库到 2022 年 12 月 20 日,我们检索了 6 个数据库(万方、中国知网、PubMed、Embase、Cochrane 图书馆和 PsycINFO)。两名独立的审查员根据纳入标准筛选出可能相关的研究,提取数据,并根据系统评价和荟萃分析首选报告项目的修改后的 10 项物理治疗证据数据库量表评估合格试验的方法学质量。最终,纳入了 10 对符合条件的 9 项随机对照试验(RCT)进行荟萃分析。使用质量效应(QE)和随机效应(RE)模型同时计算反应率、缓解率和不良事件发生率的综合优势比(OR)。使用标准化均数差值同时表达与抗抑郁作用相关的抑郁评分变化。本研究已在国际前瞻性注册系统评价数据库(CRD42022376790)注册。

结果

纳入了 602 项 RCT 中的 9 项,共涵盖 1124 名患者(616 名接受 TBS 方案治疗,508 名接受标准 rTMS 治疗)。两种治疗方法的反应率差异无统计学意义(OR=1.01,95%CI:0.88-1.16,p=0.44,I=0%,RE 模型;OR=1.07,95%CI:0.87-1.32,p=0.44,I=0%,QE 模型)。TBS 组与标准 rTMS 组的不良事件发生率差异无统计学意义。

结论

TBS 治疗抑郁症的疗效和安全性与标准 rTMS 相似。考虑到每日刺激疗程较短,本荟萃分析支持继续开发 TBS 治疗抑郁症。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验