Caio Osoegawa1, July Silveira Gomes2, Ruth Bartelli Grigolon1, Elisa Brietzke3, Ary Gadelha2, Acioly L T Lacerda4, Álvaro Machado Dias1, Quirino Cordeiro1, Ronaldo Laranjeira1, Danilo de Jesus5, Zafiris Jeff Daskalakis5, Jerome Brunelin6, Joachim Cordes7, Alisson Paulino Trevizol8. 1. Federal University of São Paulo, Brazil. 2. Federal University of São Paulo, Brazil; Schizophrenia Program, Federal University of São Paulo (PROESQ), Brazil. 3. Federal University of São Paulo, Brazil; Mood Disorders Psychopharmacology Unit, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada; University of Toronto, Canada. 4. Federal University of São Paulo, Brazil; Center for Research and Clinical Trials Sinapse-Bairral, Instituto Bairral de Psiquiatria, Brazil. 5. University of Toronto, Canada. 6. Lyon Neuroscience Research Center, Lyon 1 University, Lyon, France. 7. Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Heinrich-Heine University of Düsseldorf, Germany. 8. Mood Disorders Psychopharmacology Unit, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada; University of Toronto, Canada. Electronic address: alisson.trevizol@mail.utoronto.ca.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Schizophrenia is a mental disorder with significant socioeconomic burden. Although current pharmacological treatments are effective for treating positive symptoms, medications have little-to-no effect in the treatment of negative symptoms. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) for negative symptoms in schizophrenia in randomized clinical trials (RCTs). METHODS: A systematic review in Medline and Cochrane Library databases was performed up to May 31, 2017. The primary outcome was Hedges' g for continuous scores in a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was evaluated with the I2 and χ2 tests. Publication bias was assessed using Begg's funnel plot. RESULTS: 31 RCTs (n = 1272) were included, most with small-to-modest sample sizes. Both repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) were superior to sham (Hedges' g = 0.19; 95% CI 0.07-0.32; and 0.5; 0.02-0.97, respectively). Only one study evaluated the use of transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS). The funnel plot and Eggers test showed that the risk of publication bias was low. In relation to heterogeneity, we found an I2 of 0% (p = 0.749) and 51.3% (0.055) for rTMS and tDCS, respectively. CONCLUSION: Both rTMS and tDCS were superior to sham stimulation for ameliorating negative symptoms in schizophrenia. We found no considerable heterogeneity or publication bias in our analysis, corroborating the strength of our findings. Not enough studies on other NIBS techniques, such as taVNS, were found for an isolated analysis. Further RCTs with larger sample sizes are needed to clarify the specific impact of NIBS on negative symptoms in schizophrenia.
BACKGROUND:Schizophrenia is a mental disorder with significant socioeconomic burden. Although current pharmacological treatments are effective for treating positive symptoms, medications have little-to-no effect in the treatment of negative symptoms. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) for negative symptoms in schizophrenia in randomized clinical trials (RCTs). METHODS: A systematic review in Medline and Cochrane Library databases was performed up to May 31, 2017. The primary outcome was Hedges' g for continuous scores in a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was evaluated with the I2 and χ2 tests. Publication bias was assessed using Begg's funnel plot. RESULTS: 31 RCTs (n = 1272) were included, most with small-to-modest sample sizes. Both repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) were superior to sham (Hedges' g = 0.19; 95% CI 0.07-0.32; and 0.5; 0.02-0.97, respectively). Only one study evaluated the use of transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS). The funnel plot and Eggers test showed that the risk of publication bias was low. In relation to heterogeneity, we found an I2 of 0% (p = 0.749) and 51.3% (0.055) for rTMS and tDCS, respectively. CONCLUSION: Both rTMS and tDCS were superior to sham stimulation for ameliorating negative symptoms in schizophrenia. We found no considerable heterogeneity or publication bias in our analysis, corroborating the strength of our findings. Not enough studies on other NIBS techniques, such as taVNS, were found for an isolated analysis. Further RCTs with larger sample sizes are needed to clarify the specific impact of NIBS on negative symptoms in schizophrenia.
Keywords:
Meta-analysis; Non-pharmacological therapies; Schizophrenia; Systematic review; Transcranial direct current stimulation; Transcranial magnetic stimulation
Authors: Leandro da Costa Lane Valiengo; Stephan Goerigk; Pedro Caldana Gordon; Frank Padberg; Mauricio Henriques Serpa; Stephanie Koebe; Leonardo Afonso Dos Santos; Roger Alberto Marcos Lovera; Juliana Barbosa de Carvalho; Martinus van de Bilt; Acioly L T Lacerda; Helio Elkis; Wagner Farid Gattaz; Andre R Brunoni Journal: JAMA Psychiatry Date: 2020-02-01 Impact factor: 21.596
Authors: Melanie L Bozzay; Jennifer M Primack; Hannah R Swearingen; Jennifer Barredo; Noah S Philip Journal: Trials Date: 2020-11-12 Impact factor: 2.279