Copyright
©The Author(s) 2015.
World J Psychiatr. Jun 22, 2015; 5(2): 170-181
Published online Jun 22, 2015. doi: 10.5498/wjp.v5.i2.170
Published online Jun 22, 2015. doi: 10.5498/wjp.v5.i2.170
Table 4 Summary of meta-analyses comparing transcranial magnetic stimulation and electroconvulsive therapy in depression
Meta-analysis | No. of studies/sample size | Mean age range | Summary of effect |
Berlim et al[47] 2013 | 7/294 | 31.0-63.6 | NNT = 6 favouring ECT for short-term response; at baseline, ECT samples had shorter illness duration and higher HAMD scores than rTMS samples. Age has no moderating effect on the differences |
Ren et al[46] 2014 | 9/425 | 31.0-63.6 | NNT = 7 for response; 6 for remission favouring ECT; No significant group difference when continuous change in HAMD scores is considered as outcome; In the absence of psychosis, rTMS as efficacious as ECT; Cognitive domains are better preserved after rTMS than ECT |
Micallef-Trigona[49] 2014 | 9/384 | 34.0-63.6 | Hedges’g = 1.28 for rTMS and 2.15 for ECT. rTMS produces a mean reduction of 9.3 points; ECT produces a mean reduction of 15.42 points on the HDRS |
Xie et al[48] 2013 | 9/395 | 31.0-63.6 | OR = 0.55 for response and 0.49 for remission in favour of ECT; rTMS is better tolerated than ECT (OR = 0.70); rTMS > 1200 stimuli/d is as efficacious as ECT |
- Citation: Sabesan P, Lankappa S, Khalifa N, Krishnan V, Gandhi R, Palaniyappan L. Transcranial magnetic stimulation for geriatric depression: Promises and pitfalls. World J Psychiatr 2015; 5(2): 170-181
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2220-3206/full/v5/i2/170.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5498/wjp.v5.i2.170