Terao Itsuki, Tsuge Takahiro, Sato Tomoo, Endo Kaori, Kotake Kazumasa, Banno Masahiro, Kataoka Yuki
Department of Psychiatry Ikokoro Clinic Nihonbashi Tokyo Japan.
Scientific Research WorkS Peer Support Group (SRWS-PSG) Osaka Japan.
PCN Rep. 2025 Jun 29;4(3):e70136. doi: 10.1002/pcn5.70136. eCollection 2025 Sep.
Although electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is the standard treatment for Stage 2 or higher treatment-resistant depression, it has several drawbacks. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and intravenous racemic ketamine (IV ketamine) have emerged as potential alternatives, but their comparative effectiveness and safety remain unclear due to limited evidence. We systematically searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and trial registries for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to 18 December 2023. Random-effects network meta-analyses were performed to compare the antidepressant efficacy, tolerability, and acceptability of ECT, IV ketamine, and rTMS. Thirty-five RCTs ( = 2109) were included. Most of the included studies had small sample sizes. There were no significant differences in response rate, remission rate, or tolerability of IV ketamine, rTMS, and ECT, while IV ketamine had significantly higher acceptability compared to rTMS and ECT. The confidence in the evidence for efficacy, tolerability, and acceptability was very low. IV ketamine and rTMS did not demonstrate apparent inferiority to ECT in terms of antidepressant efficacy and safety. Considering the various drawbacks of ECT, both treatments may have the potential to serve as viable alternatives. However, the confidence of the evidence in this study is rated as very low, possibly due to small-study bias, highlighting the need for further large-scale studies to strengthen the findings.
尽管电休克疗法(ECT)是治疗2期或更高程度难治性抑郁症的标准方法,但它存在若干缺点。重复经颅磁刺激(rTMS)和静脉注射消旋氯胺酮(静脉注射氯胺酮)已成为潜在的替代方法,但由于证据有限,它们的相对有效性和安全性仍不明确。我们系统检索了Cochrane对照试验中央登记库、MEDLINE、EMBASE以及试验注册库,以查找截至2023年12月18日的随机对照试验(RCT)。进行随机效应网络荟萃分析,以比较ECT、静脉注射氯胺酮和rTMS的抗抑郁疗效、耐受性和可接受性。纳入了35项RCT(n = 2109)。纳入的大多数研究样本量较小。静脉注射氯胺酮、rTMS和ECT在缓解率、治愈率或耐受性方面没有显著差异,而静脉注射氯胺酮的可接受性明显高于rTMS和ECT。关于疗效、耐受性和可接受性的证据可信度非常低。在抗抑郁疗效和安全性方面,静脉注射氯胺酮和rTMS并未显示出明显逊于ECT。考虑到ECT的各种缺点,这两种治疗方法都有可能成为可行的替代方法。然而,本研究中证据的可信度被评为非常低,可能是由于小研究偏差,这突出表明需要进一步开展大规模研究以强化研究结果。