Bilateral repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment-resistant depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

There has been concern regarding the use of controversial paradigms for repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) to manage treatment-resistant depression (TRD). This meta-analysis assessed the efficacy of bilateral rTMS compared with unilateral and sham rTMS in patients with TRD. PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, EAGLE and NTIS databases were searched to identify relevant studies, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on bilateral rTMS for TRD patients were included. The response was defined as the primary outcome, and remission was the secondary outcome. Ten RCTs that included 634 patients met the eligibility criteria. The risk ratio (RRs) of both the primary and secondary outcomes of bilateral rTMS showed non-significant increases compared to unilateral rTMS (RR=1.01, P=0.93; odds ratio [OR]=0.77, P=0.22). Notably, the RR of the primary bilateral rTMS outcome was significantly increased compared to that for sham rTMS (RR=3.43, P=0.0004). The results of our analysis demonstrated that bilateral rTMS was significantly more effective than sham rTMS but not unilateral rTMS in patients with TRD. Thus, bilateral rTMS may not be a useful paradigm for patients with TRD.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Zhang,Y.Q., Zhu,D., Zhou,X.Y., Liu,Y.Y., Qin,B., Ren,G.P., Xie,P.
Format: Digital revista
Language:English
Published: Associação Brasileira de Divulgação Científica 2015
Online Access:http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-879X2015000300198
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id oai:scielo:S0100-879X2015000300198
record_format ojs
spelling oai:scielo:S0100-879X20150003001982019-03-19Bilateral repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment-resistant depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trialsZhang,Y.Q.Zhu,D.Zhou,X.Y.Liu,Y.Y.Qin,B.Ren,G.P.Xie,P. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation Treatment-resistant depression Meta-analysis, Randomized controlled trials There has been concern regarding the use of controversial paradigms for repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) to manage treatment-resistant depression (TRD). This meta-analysis assessed the efficacy of bilateral rTMS compared with unilateral and sham rTMS in patients with TRD. PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, EAGLE and NTIS databases were searched to identify relevant studies, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on bilateral rTMS for TRD patients were included. The response was defined as the primary outcome, and remission was the secondary outcome. Ten RCTs that included 634 patients met the eligibility criteria. The risk ratio (RRs) of both the primary and secondary outcomes of bilateral rTMS showed non-significant increases compared to unilateral rTMS (RR=1.01, P=0.93; odds ratio [OR]=0.77, P=0.22). Notably, the RR of the primary bilateral rTMS outcome was significantly increased compared to that for sham rTMS (RR=3.43, P=0.0004). The results of our analysis demonstrated that bilateral rTMS was significantly more effective than sham rTMS but not unilateral rTMS in patients with TRD. Thus, bilateral rTMS may not be a useful paradigm for patients with TRD.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessAssociação Brasileira de Divulgação CientíficaBrazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research v.48 n.3 20152015-03-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articletext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-879X2015000300198en10.1590/1414-431x20144270
institution SCIELO
collection OJS
country Brasil
countrycode BR
component Revista
access En linea
databasecode rev-scielo-br
tag revista
region America del Sur
libraryname SciELO
language English
format Digital
author Zhang,Y.Q.
Zhu,D.
Zhou,X.Y.
Liu,Y.Y.
Qin,B.
Ren,G.P.
Xie,P.
spellingShingle Zhang,Y.Q.
Zhu,D.
Zhou,X.Y.
Liu,Y.Y.
Qin,B.
Ren,G.P.
Xie,P.
Bilateral repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment-resistant depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
author_facet Zhang,Y.Q.
Zhu,D.
Zhou,X.Y.
Liu,Y.Y.
Qin,B.
Ren,G.P.
Xie,P.
author_sort Zhang,Y.Q.
title Bilateral repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment-resistant depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_short Bilateral repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment-resistant depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_full Bilateral repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment-resistant depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_fullStr Bilateral repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment-resistant depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_full_unstemmed Bilateral repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment-resistant depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_sort bilateral repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment-resistant depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
description There has been concern regarding the use of controversial paradigms for repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) to manage treatment-resistant depression (TRD). This meta-analysis assessed the efficacy of bilateral rTMS compared with unilateral and sham rTMS in patients with TRD. PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, EAGLE and NTIS databases were searched to identify relevant studies, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on bilateral rTMS for TRD patients were included. The response was defined as the primary outcome, and remission was the secondary outcome. Ten RCTs that included 634 patients met the eligibility criteria. The risk ratio (RRs) of both the primary and secondary outcomes of bilateral rTMS showed non-significant increases compared to unilateral rTMS (RR=1.01, P=0.93; odds ratio [OR]=0.77, P=0.22). Notably, the RR of the primary bilateral rTMS outcome was significantly increased compared to that for sham rTMS (RR=3.43, P=0.0004). The results of our analysis demonstrated that bilateral rTMS was significantly more effective than sham rTMS but not unilateral rTMS in patients with TRD. Thus, bilateral rTMS may not be a useful paradigm for patients with TRD.
publisher Associação Brasileira de Divulgação Científica
publishDate 2015
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-879X2015000300198
work_keys_str_mv AT zhangyq bilateralrepetitivetranscranialmagneticstimulationfortreatmentresistantdepressionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT zhud bilateralrepetitivetranscranialmagneticstimulationfortreatmentresistantdepressionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT zhouxy bilateralrepetitivetranscranialmagneticstimulationfortreatmentresistantdepressionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT liuyy bilateralrepetitivetranscranialmagneticstimulationfortreatmentresistantdepressionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT qinb bilateralrepetitivetranscranialmagneticstimulationfortreatmentresistantdepressionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT rengp bilateralrepetitivetranscranialmagneticstimulationfortreatmentresistantdepressionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT xiep bilateralrepetitivetranscranialmagneticstimulationfortreatmentresistantdepressionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
_version_ 1756391496324481024