Christian Plewnia1, Patrizio Pasqualetti2, Stephan Große3, Sarah Schlipf3, Barbara Wasserka3, Bastian Zwissler3, Andreas Fallgatter3. 1. Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Neurophysiology & Interventional Neuropsychiatry, University of Tübingen, Calwerstrasse 14, Tübingen D-72076, Germany. Electronic address: christian.plewnia@uni-tuebingen.de. 2. Medical Statistics & Information Technology, AFaR, Fatebenefratelli Hospital, Isola Tiberina, Rome. 3. Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Neurophysiology & Interventional Neuropsychiatry, University of Tübingen, Calwerstrasse 14, Tübingen D-72076, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Current efforts to improve clinical effectiveness and utility of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in the treatment of major depression (MD) include theta burst stimulation (TBS), a patterned form of rTMS. Here, we investigated the efficacy of bilateral TBS to the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) in patients with MD in additon to ongoing medication and psychotherapy. METHODS: In this randomized-controlled trial, thirty-two patients with MD were treated for six weeks (thirty sessions) with either successively intermittent, activity enhancing TBS (iTBS) to the left and continuous, inhibiting TBS (cTBS) to the right dlPFC or with bilateral sham stimulation. Primary outcome measure was the proportion of treatment response defined as a Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS)≤50% compared to baseline. Secondary outcomes comprised response and remission rates of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). RESULTS: A larger number of responders were found in the cTBS (n=9) compared to the sham-stimulation (n=4) group (odds ratio: 3.86; Wald χ(2)=3.9, p=0.048). On secondary endpoint analysis, patient-reported outcome as assessed by the BDI, pointed towards a higher rate of remitters in the cTBS (n=6) than in the sham (n=1) group (odds ratio: 9; Wald χ(2)=3.5, p=0.061). LIMITATIONS: With regard to the pilot character of the study and the small sample size, the results have to be considered as preliminary. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide first evidence that six weeks treatment of MDD with iTBS to the left and cTBS to the right dlPFC for six weeks is safe, feasible and superior to sham stimulation applied add-on to pharmacological and psychotherapeutic treatment.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Current efforts to improve clinical effectiveness and utility of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in the treatment of major depression (MD) include theta burst stimulation (TBS), a patterned form of rTMS. Here, we investigated the efficacy of bilateral TBS to the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) in patients with MD in additon to ongoing medication and psychotherapy. METHODS: In this randomized-controlled trial, thirty-two patients with MD were treated for six weeks (thirty sessions) with either successively intermittent, activity enhancing TBS (iTBS) to the left and continuous, inhibiting TBS (cTBS) to the right dlPFC or with bilateral sham stimulation. Primary outcome measure was the proportion of treatment response defined as a Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS)≤50% compared to baseline. Secondary outcomes comprised response and remission rates of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). RESULTS: A larger number of responders were found in the cTBS (n=9) compared to the sham-stimulation (n=4) group (odds ratio: 3.86; Wald χ(2)=3.9, p=0.048). On secondary endpoint analysis, patient-reported outcome as assessed by the BDI, pointed towards a higher rate of remitters in the cTBS (n=6) than in the sham (n=1) group (odds ratio: 9; Wald χ(2)=3.5, p=0.061). LIMITATIONS: With regard to the pilot character of the study and the small sample size, the results have to be considered as preliminary. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide first evidence that six weeks treatment of MDD with iTBS to the left and cTBS to the right dlPFC for six weeks is safe, feasible and superior to sham stimulation applied add-on to pharmacological and psychotherapeutic treatment.
Authors: Sung Wook Chung; Nigel C Rogasch; Kate E Hoy; Caley M Sullivan; Robin F H Cash; Paul B Fitzgerald Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2017-11-09 Impact factor: 5.038
Authors: Diego Freitas Tavares; Paulo Suen; Carla Garcia Rodrigues Dos Santos; Doris Hupfeld Moreno; Leandro Da Costa Lane Valiengo; Izio Klein; Lucas Borrione; Pamela Marques Forte; André R Brunoni; Ricardo Alberto Moreno Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2021-06-30 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: Mercedes Cabrerizo; Anastasio Cabrera; Juan O Perez; Jesus de la Rua; Niovi Rojas; Qi Zhou; Alberto Pinzon-Ardila; Sergio M Gonzalez-Arias; Malek Adjouadi Journal: ScientificWorldJournal Date: 2014-07-17
Authors: Simone Rossi; Andrea Antal; Sven Bestmann; Marom Bikson; Carmen Brewer; Jürgen Brockmöller; Linda L Carpenter; Massimo Cincotta; Robert Chen; Jeff D Daskalakis; Vincenzo Di Lazzaro; Michael D Fox; Mark S George; Donald Gilbert; Vasilios K Kimiskidis; Giacomo Koch; Risto J Ilmoniemi; Jean Pascal Lefaucheur; Letizia Leocani; Sarah H Lisanby; Carlo Miniussi; Frank Padberg; Alvaro Pascual-Leone; Walter Paulus; Angel V Peterchev; Angelo Quartarone; Alexander Rotenberg; John Rothwell; Paolo M Rossini; Emiliano Santarnecchi; Mouhsin M Shafi; Hartwig R Siebner; Yoshikatzu Ugawa; Eric M Wassermann; Abraham Zangen; Ulf Ziemann; Mark Hallett Journal: Clin Neurophysiol Date: 2020-10-24 Impact factor: 4.861