We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
META-ANALYSIS
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
REVIEW
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
A systematic review and meta-analysis of deep brain stimulation for depression.
Depression and Anxiety 2018 May
BACKGROUND: Deep brain stimulation is increasingly being used for treatment-resistant depression. Blinded, randomized controlled trials of active versus sham treatment have been limited to small numbers.
METHOD: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis on the effectiveness of deep brain stimulation (DBS) in depression. Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed/Medline, Embase and PsycINFO, Chinese Biomedical Literature Service System, and China Knowledge Resource Integrated Database were searched for single- or double placebo-controlled, crossover, and parallel-group trials in which DBS was compared with sham treatment using validated scales.
RESULTS: Ten papers from nine studies met inclusion criteria, all but two of which were double-blinded RCTs. The main outcome was a reduction in depressive symptoms. It was possible to combine data for 190 participants. Patients on active, as opposed to sham, treatment had a significantly higher response (OR = 5.50; 95% CI = 2.79, 10.85; p < .0001) and reductions in mean depression score (SMD = -0.42; 95% CI = -0.72, -0.12; p = .006). However, the effect was attenuated on some of the subgroup and sensitivity analyses, and there were no differences for most other outcomes. In addition, 84 participants experienced a total of 131 serious adverse effects, although not all could be directly associated with the device or surgery. Finally, publication bias was possible.
CONCLUSIONS: DBS may show promise for treatment-resistant depression but remains an experimental treatment until further data are available.
METHOD: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis on the effectiveness of deep brain stimulation (DBS) in depression. Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed/Medline, Embase and PsycINFO, Chinese Biomedical Literature Service System, and China Knowledge Resource Integrated Database were searched for single- or double placebo-controlled, crossover, and parallel-group trials in which DBS was compared with sham treatment using validated scales.
RESULTS: Ten papers from nine studies met inclusion criteria, all but two of which were double-blinded RCTs. The main outcome was a reduction in depressive symptoms. It was possible to combine data for 190 participants. Patients on active, as opposed to sham, treatment had a significantly higher response (OR = 5.50; 95% CI = 2.79, 10.85; p < .0001) and reductions in mean depression score (SMD = -0.42; 95% CI = -0.72, -0.12; p = .006). However, the effect was attenuated on some of the subgroup and sensitivity analyses, and there were no differences for most other outcomes. In addition, 84 participants experienced a total of 131 serious adverse effects, although not all could be directly associated with the device or surgery. Finally, publication bias was possible.
CONCLUSIONS: DBS may show promise for treatment-resistant depression but remains an experimental treatment until further data are available.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app