Systematic review and meta-analysis of bifrontal electroconvulsive therapy versus bilateral and unilateral electroconvulsive therapy in depression.
ABSTRACT Our aim was to perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing efficacy and side effects of bifrontal (BF) ECT to bitemporal (BT) or unilateral (RUL) ECT in depression.
We performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials comparing BF ECT with RUL or BT ECT in depression. Eight trials (n=617) reported some cognitive outcome. Efficacy was measured by reduction in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale score. Cognitive outcomes were limited to Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) in seven studies, with two studies measuring each of: Complex-figure delayed recall, Trail-making tests and verbal learning.
Efficacy was equal between BF and BT ECT (Hedges's g=0.102, P=0.345, confidence interval (CI): -0.110, 0.313) and BF and RUL ECT (standardized mean difference=-0.12, P=0.365, CI: -0.378, 0.139). Post-treatment MMSE score decline was less for BF than BT ECT (g=0.89, CI: 0.054, 1.724) but not RUL ECT. RUL ECT impaired Complex figure recall more than BF ECT (g=0.76, CI :0.487, 1.035), but BF ECT impaired word recall more than RUL ECT (g=-1.45, CI: -2.75, -0.15).
Bifrontal ECT is not more effective than BT or RUL ECT but may have modest short-term benefits for specific memory domains. BF ECT has potential advantages, but given longer experience with BT and RUL, bifrontal ECT requires better characterization.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to compare the clinical effects of frontoparietal electrode placement, an alternative montage for right unilateral electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), with the commonly used temporoparietal montage. In a single patient who received alternate treatments with the abovementioned right unilateral montages, within a treatment course of ECT, time-to-reorientation after each treatment and seizure expression were compared. Computer modeling was used to simulate and compare differences in electrical stimulation patterns in key cerebral regions, with the 2 montages. These simulations were done in an anatomically realistic head model recreated from magnetic resonance imaging scans of the patient's head. Time-to-reorientation was shorter after treatment with frontoparietal ECT (mean, 28.3 minutes; SD, 2.9 minutes) than after temporoparietal ECT (mean, 50.0 minutes; SD, 11.5 minutes), suggesting less retrograde memory impairment. Seizure duration and expression were similar for the 2 montages. Computer modeling demonstrated less hippocampal and right inferior frontal cortical stimulation but comparable anterior cingulate cortex stimulation with the frontoparietal montage. These results, although preliminary, suggest that the frontoparietal montage may result in less memory side effects, but comparable efficacy, to the temporoparietal montage.The journal of ECT 05/2014; DOI:10.1097/YCT.0000000000000147 · 1.39 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Depression is the leading cause of disability worldwide, affecting approximately 350 million people. Evidence indicates that only 60-70% of persons with major depressive disorder who tolerate antidepressants respond to first-line drug treatment; the remainder become treatment resistant. Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is considered an effective therapy in persons with treatment-resistant depression. The use of ECT is controversial due to concerns about temporary cognitive impairment in the acute post-treatment period. We will conduct a meta-analysis to examine the effects of ECT on cognition in persons with depression. This systematic review and meta-analysis has been registered with PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42014009100). We developed our methods following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. We are searching MEDLINE, PsychINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane from the date of database inception to the end of October 2014. We are also searching the reference lists of published reviews and evidence reports for additional citations. Comparative studies (randomised controlled trials, cohort and case-control) published in English will be included in the meta-analysis. Three clinical neuropsychologists will group the cognitive tests in each included article into a set of mutually exclusive cognitive subdomains. The risk of bias of randomised controlled trials will be assessed using the Jadad scale. We will supplement the Jadad scale with additional questions based on the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The risk of bias of cohort and case-control studies will be assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We will employ the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) to assess the strength of evidence. Separate meta-analyses will be conducted for each ECT treatment modality and cognitive subdomain using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis V.2.0. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.BMJ Open 03/2015; 5(3):e006966. DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006966 · 2.06 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is widely applied to treat severe depression resistant to standard treatment. Results from previous studies comparing the cost-effectiveness of this technique with treatment alternatives such as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) are conflicting.Method We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing ECT alone, rTMS alone and rTMS followed by ECT when rTMS fails under the perspective of the Spanish National Health Service. The analysis is based on a Markov model which simulates the costs and health outcomes of individuals treated under these alternatives over a 12-month period. Data to populate this model were extracted and synthesized from a series of randomized controlled trials and other studies that have compared these techniques on the patient group of interest. We measure effectiveness using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and characterize the uncertainty using probabilistic sensitivity analyses.Results ECT alone was found to be less costly and more effective than rTMS alone, while the strategy of providing rTMS followed by ECT when rTMS fails is the most expensive and effective option. The incremental cost per QALY gained of this latter strategy was found to be above the reference willingness-to-pay threshold used in these types of studies in Spain and other countries. The probability that ECT alone is the most cost-effective alternative was estimated to be around 70%.Conclusions ECT is likely to be the most cost-effective option in the treatment of resistant severe depression for a willingness to pay of €30 000 per QALY.Psychological Medicine 10/2014; 45(07):1-12. DOI:10.1017/S0033291714002554 · 5.43 Impact Factor