| Literature DB >> 23922809 |
Howard R Weeks1, Scott C Tadler, Kelly W Smith, Eli Iacob, Mikala Saccoman, Andrea T White, Joshua D Landvatter, Gordon J Chelune, Yana Suchy, Elaine Clark, Michael K Cahalan, Lowry Bushnell, Derek Sakata, Alan R Light, Kathleen C Light.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many patients have serious depression that is nonresponsive to medications, but refuse electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). Early research suggested that isoflurane anesthesia may be an effective alternative to ECT. Subsequent studies altered drug, dose or number of treatments, and failed to replicate this success, halting research on isoflurane's antidepressant effects for a decade. Our aim was to re-examine whether isoflurane has antidepressant effects comparable to ECT, with less adverse effects on cognition.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23922809 PMCID: PMC3724904 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0069809
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Group Demographics, Intellectual Level, Depression Severity, and Pretreatment Medications.
|
|
|
| |
|
| 12/20 | 6/8 | 3/8 |
|
| 16/4 | 5/3 | 5/3 |
|
| 41.60 (2.80) | 41.38 (5.39) | 35.38 (3.50) |
|
| 107.90 (2.19) | 107.88 (4.67) | 117.00 (5.01) |
|
| |||
| Pretreatment HRSD-24 | 36.55 (2.08) | 28.00 (2.20) | 26.63 (1.42) |
| Post-Treatment HRSD-24 | 10.05 (1.98) | 9.25 (2.32) | 12.50 (3.63) |
| Follow-up HRSD-24 | 14.32 (2.14) | 8.88 (2.27) | 17.57 (2.82) |
| Post-Treatment % remission | 50% | 50% | 50% |
| Post-Treatment % responders | 90% | 88% | 75% |
|
| |||
| SSRI | 9 | 5 | 2 |
| SNRI | 8 | 1 | 3 |
| NRI | 3 | 1 | 0 |
| Lithium/valproate | 5 | 1 | 2 |
| Antipsychotic | 8 | 2 | 5 |
| Anticonvulsant | 14 | 6 | 2 |
| No psychotropic meds | 3 | 1 | 1 |
ECT-All vs. ISO, p<0.05; ECT-Matched vs. ISO nonsignificant.
ECT-Matched vs. ISO, p<0.05; ECT-All vs. ISO non-significant.
Group differences non-significant.
Responders are defined as at least 50% reduction in HRSD score.
Anticonvulsant medications were stopped during treatment sessions in all groups.
Figure 1Scores on Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD-24) at Pretreatment), 24–48 hours after the last treatment (Post-treatment) and at 4-week Follow-up.
Treatment with ECT and ISO result in significant decreases in HRSD-24 depressive symptoms at both Post-treatment and Follow-up compared to Pretreatment. No significant group differences were seen at Post-treatment, but ECT-Matched maintained these low scores better than ISO at Follow-up. + ECT-All vs. ISO p<0.05, & ECT-Matched vs. ISO p<0.05, *Within-group ECT-All Change from Pretreatment p<0.001, # Within-group ECT-Matched Change from Pretreatment p<0.01, @ Within-group ISO Change from Pretreatment p<0.005 at Post-treatment and p<0.05 at Follow-up.
Figure 2Scores on the Quick Inventory of Depression Scale (QIDS-SR16) self report form over 21 days of treatment (treatment sessions 1–10).
For brevity, results are depicted showing change over each week, from Day 1 (prior to 1st treatment), Day 7 (prior to 4th treatment), Day 14 (prior to 7th treatment), and Day 21 (prior to 10th treatment). *Within-group ECT-All Change from Day 1 p<0.05, # Within-group ECT-Matched Change from Day 1 p<0.05, @ Within-group ISO Change from Day 1 p<0.05.
Neurocognitive Means (SEM) at Pretreatment, Post-Treatment and Follow-up, Adjusted for Intellectual Level and Age.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| ||||||
| ECT-All | 45.04 (2.49) | 0.41 | 42.02 (3.10) |
| 50.83 (2.57) |
|
| ECT-Matched | 47.63 (3.33) | 0.39 | 51.45 (4.77) | 0.40 | 58.23 (3.90) | 0.84 |
| ISO | 49.40 (4.20) | 61.08 (5.23) | 60.34 (4.58) | |||
|
| ||||||
| ECT-All | 44.03 (2.69) | 0.18 | 40.65 (3.22) | 0.09 | 50.05 (2.30) | 0.65 |
| ECT-Matched | 48.25 (3.55) | 0.28 | 52.68 (3.61) | 0.78 | 55.17 (2.47) | 0.28 |
| ISO | 51.80 (4.54) | 56.76 (5.42) | 55.25 (4.10) | |||
|
| ||||||
| ECT-All | 47.55 (2.38) | 0.24 | 35.56 (2.94) |
| 46.66 (1.59) |
|
| ECT-Matched | 50.77 (3.26) | 0.48 | 41.42 (4.87) | 0.19 | 49.33 (2.43) |
|
| ISO | 53.44 (4.01) | 56.05 (4.95) | 55.93 (2.83) | |||
|
| ||||||
| ECT-All | 9.42 (0.55) | 0.23 | 8.69 (0.73) |
| 11.45 (0.69) |
|
| ECT-Matched | 9.00 (0.79) | 0.07 | 10.31 (0.90) | 0.21 | 12.91 (1.01) | 0.80 |
| ISO | 10.83 (0.94) | 13.49 (1.19) | 15.32 (1.41) | |||
|
| ||||||
| ECT-All | 10.53 (0.54) | 0.85 | 8.18 (0.83) |
| 11.59 (0.58) |
|
| ECT-Matched | 10.54 (0.81) | 0.67 | 10.70 (1.18) |
| 13.08 (0.61) |
|
| ISO | 10.31 (0.91) | 15.40 (1.35) | 15.54 (1.18) | |||
|
| ||||||
| ECT-All | 10.32 (0.63) | 0.11 | 6.00 (0.79) |
| 9.47 (0.78) | 0.30 |
| ECT-Matched | 9.94 (0.98) | 0.33 | 6.90 (1.12) |
| 10.00 (0.68) | 0.37 |
| ISO | 8.20 (1.06) | 11.14 (1.34) | 10.02 (1.39) | |||
|
| ||||||
| ECT-All | 53.39 (1.10) | 0.62 | 37.18 (1.88) |
| 37.14 (1.93) |
|
| ECT-Matched | 52.71 (1.94) | 0.55 | 40.28 (2.56) | 0.07 | 39.36 (2.41) |
|
| ISO | 54.53 (1.85) | 50.54 (3.17) | 48.79 (3.45) | |||
|
| ||||||
| ECT-All | 93.22 (3.90) |
| 87.40 (3.36) |
| 97.89 (3.56) |
|
| ECT-Matched | 91.16 (8.04) | 0.09 | 91.44 (6.73) | 0.23 | 99.71 (6.99) | 0.13 |
| ISO | 112.20 (6.58) | 109.75 (5.67) | 119.96 (2.26) |
All p-values are for mean comparisons versus ISO after adjustment for group differences in age and WTAR score. Post-treatment and Follow-up p-values are also adjusted for group differences in Pretreatment and thus test group differences in performance decline or improvement from Pretreatment levels.
Cohen's d effect sizes for significant comparisons were consistently large and ranged from 1.1 to 1.7.