Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-hvd4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-12T22:58:02.377Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

rTMS age-dependent response in treatment-resistant depressed subjects: a mini-review

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 April 2012

Stefano Pallanti ,
Andrea Cantisani ,
Giacomo Grassi ,
Sarah Antonini ,
Chiara Cecchelli ,
Jiulia Burian ,
Gilla Cauli  and
Leonardo Quercioli
Stefano Pallanti*
Affiliation:
University of Florence, Florence, Italy Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA
Andrea Cantisani
Affiliation:
University of Florence, Florence, Italy
Giacomo Grassi
Affiliation:
University of Florence, Florence, Italy
Sarah Antonini
Affiliation:
Istituto di Neuroscienze (INS), Florence, Italy
Chiara Cecchelli
Affiliation:
Istituto di Neuroscienze (INS), Florence, Italy
Jiulia Burian
Affiliation:
University of Florence, Florence, Italy
Gilla Cauli
Affiliation:
Istituto di Neuroscienze (INS), Florence, Italy
Leonardo Quercioli
Affiliation:
Azienda Ospedaliera S.Paolo, Milan, Italy
*
*Address correspondence to: Stefano Pallanti, Department of Psychiatry, University of Florence, Via delle Gore 2 H, 50139 Florence, Italy. Email stefanopallanti@yahoo.it
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background

In old age, depressive syndromes often affect people with chronic medical illnesses, cognitive impairment, and disability, which can worsen the outcomes of other medical disorders and promote disability. Repetitive magnetic transcranial stimulation (rTMS) is a simple and effective treatment in patients with treatment-resistant depression. Therefore the use of rTMS could be of particular potential benefit in treatment-resistant elderly patients, who often cannot tolerate the higher doses of drugs needed or show phenomena of intolerance and interaction. However, several studies assessing the efficacy of rTMS found smaller response rates in elderly patients when compared to younger samples. Nevertheless, the correlation between age and response is still a controversial issue, and there is no strong evidence to date. The aim of our study was to retest the effectiveness and safety of low-frequency rTMS in a 3 weeks active treatment in a group of resistant-depressed patients, and to investigate the role of age in the response to stimulation treatment.

Methods

Enrolled in this study were 102 treatment-resistant depressed patients. The patients were treated with low-frequency rTMS over the right dorso-lateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) for 3 weeks with a simple protocol (420 pulses per session for 15 sessions). At baseline, at the end of the second week, and at the end of the third week of treatment, the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) and the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) were administered.

Results

Low-frequency rTMS on the prefrontal dorsolateral right area resulted in a statistically significant reduction of mean HAM-D scores in the entire group of patients at the end of treatment. The responder's rate in the whole group at the end of the third week was 56.86%. A significant inverse relationship between HAM-D reduction and age was found in the “older” (>60 years old) group, not in the “younger” (<60 years old) group.

Conclusion

Results from this study show that low-frequency rTMS over the right DLPFC, with a relatively low number of pulses (420 pulses per session) and a relatively short period of treatment, is effective in the treatment of resistant patients (in a sample also including elderly patients) in a 3-weeks treatment protocol with a low reduction with the progress of age. Furthermore, we found a greater response in younger patients and an inverse correlation between age and treatment response. Adaptations of the protocol according to age are reviewed.

Keywords

Agegeriatric depressionrepetitive transcranial stimulationrTMStreatment-resistant depression
Type
Original Research Articles
Information
CNS Spectrums , Volume 17 , Issue 1 , 26 April 2012 , pp. 24 - 30
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

The authors would like to thank all the staff at Cns Onlus and at Istituto di Neuroscienze (INS) for the logistic support.

References

1.Alexopoulus, GS. Depression in the elderly. Lancet. 2005; 365(9475): 1961–1970.Google Scholar
2.Husain, MM, Rush, AJ, Sackeim, HA, et al. . Age-related characteristics of depression: a preliminary STAR*D report. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2005; 13(10): 852–860.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Cooper, C, Katona, C, Lyketsos, K, et al. . A systematic review of treatments for refractory depression in older people. Am J Psychiatry. 2011; 168(7): 681–688.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Marangell, LB, Martinez, M, Jurdi, RA, Zboyan, H. Neurostimulation therapies in depression: a review of new modalities. Acta Psychiatr. Scand. 2007; 16(3): 174–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Schutter, DJ. Antidepressant efficacy of high-frequency transcranial magnetic stimulation over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in double-blind sham-controlled designs: a meta-analysis. Psychol. Med. 2009; 39(1): 65–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Schutter, DJ. Quantitative review of the efficacy of slow-frequency magnetic brain stimulation in major depressive disorder. Psychol. Med. 2010; 40(11): 1789–1795.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Fitzgerald, PB, Benitez, J, De, CA, Daskalakis, ZJ, Brown, TL, Kulkarni, J. A randomized, controlled trial of sequential bilateral repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment-resistant depression. Am J Psychiatry. 2006; 163(1): 88–94.Google ScholarPubMed
8.Pallanti, S, Bernardi, S, Di Rollo, A, Antonini, S, Quercioli, L. Unilateral low frequency versus sequential bilateral repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation: is simpler better for treatment of resistant depression? Neuroscience. 2010; 167(2): 323–328.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Miniussi, C, Rossini, PM. Transcranial magnetic stimulation in cognitive rehabilitation. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2011; 21(5): 579–601.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Pallanti, S, Quercioli, L, Di Rollo, A, Antonini, S, Cauli, G, Hollander, E.. Low frequency rTMS over right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in the treatment of resistant depression: cognitive improvement is independent from clinical response. In press.Google Scholar
11.Figiel, GS, Epstein, C, McDonald, WM, et al. . The use of rapid-rate transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in refractory depressed patients. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci. 1998; 10(1): 20–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Padberg, F, Zwanzger, P, Thoma, H, et al. . Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in pharmacotherapy-refractory major depression: comparative study of fast, slow and sham rTMS. Psychiatry Res. 1999; 88(3): 163–171.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Manes, F, Jorge, R, Morcuende, M, et al. . A controlled study of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation as a treatment of depression in the elderly. Int Psychogeriatr. 2001; 13(2): 225–231.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Mosimann, UP, Schmitt, W, Greenberg, BD, et al. . Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation: a putative add-on treatment for major depression in elderly patients. Psychiatry Res. 2004; 126(2): 123–133.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15.Fabre, I, Galinowski, A, Oppenheim, C, et al. . Antidepressant efficacy and cognitive effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in vascular depression: an open label trial. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2004; 19(9): 833–842.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Abraham, G, Milev, R, Lazowski, L, Jokic, R, du Toit, R, Lowe, A. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment of elderly patients with depression—an open label trial. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2007; 3(6): 919–924.Google ScholarPubMed
17.Aguirre, I, Carretero, B, Ibarra, O, et al. . Age predicts low-frequency transcranial magnetic stimulation efficacy in major depression. J Affect Disord. 2011; 130(3): 466–469.Google ScholarPubMed
18.First, M, Spitzer, R, Gibbon, M, Williams, J. Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders, Clinician Version (SCID-CV). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Publishing; 1996.Google Scholar
19.Hamilton, M. A rating scale for depression. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1960; 23: 56–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20.Thase, ME, Rush, AJ. When at first you don't succeed: sequential strategies for antidepressant nonresponders. J Clin Psychiatry. 1997; 58: 23–29.Google ScholarPubMed
21.Rossini, PM, Berardelli, A, Deuschl, G, et al. . Applications of magnetic cortical stimulation. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1999; 52(Suppl.): 171–185.Google ScholarPubMed
22.Rossi, S, Hallett, M, Rossini, PM, Pascual-Leone, A. Safety of TMS Consensus Group: safety, ethical considerations, and application guidelines for the use of transcranial magnetic stimulation in clinical practice and research. Clin Neurophysiol. 2009; 120(12): 2008–2039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23.Kozel, FA, Nahas, Z, deBrux, C, et al. . How coil–cortex distance relates to age, motor threshold, and antidepressant response to repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2000; 12(3): 376–384.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24.Fregni, F, Marcolin, MA, Myczkowski, M, et al. . Predictors of antidepressant response in clinical trials of transcranial magnetic stimulation. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2006; 9(6): 641–654.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25.Herwig, U, Fallgatter, AJ, Höppner, J, et al. . Antidepressant effects of augmentative transcranial magnetic stimulation: randomized multicentre trial. Br J Psychiatry. 2007; 191: 441–448.Google Scholar
26.Lisanby, SH, Husain, MM, Rosenquist, PB, et al. . Daily left prefrontal repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in the acute treatment of major depression: clinical predictors of outcome in a multisite, randomized controlled clinical trial. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2009; 34(2): 522–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27.Nahas, Z, Li, X, Kozel, FA, et al. . Safety and benefits of distance-adjusted prefrontal transcranial magnetic stimulation in depressed patients 55–75 years of age: a pilot study. Depress Anxiety. 2004; 19(4): 249–256.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
28.Wagner, T, Eden, U, Fregni, F, et al. . Transcranial magnetic stimulation and brain atrophy: a computer-based human brain model study. Exp Brain Res. 2008; 186(4): 539–550.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
29.Brunoni, AR, Lopes, M, Fregni, F. A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies on major depression and BDNF levels: implications for the role of neuroplasticity in depression. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2008; 11(8): 1169–1180.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
30.Zanardini, R, Gazzoli, A, Ventriglia, M, et al. . Effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on serum brain derived neurotrophic factor in drug resistant depressed patients. J Affect Disord. 2006; 91(1): 83–86.Google ScholarPubMed
31.Shankar, SK. Biology of aging brain. Indian J Pathol Microbiol. 2010; 53(4): 595–604.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
32.Numakawa, T, Yokomaku, D, Richards, M, Hori, H, Adachi, N, Kunugi, H. Functional interactions between steroid hormones and neurotrophin BDNF. World J Biol Chem. 2010; 1(5): 133–143.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
33.Grunhaus, L, Dannon, PN, Schreiber, S, Dolberg, OH, Amiaz, R, Ziv, R, Lefkifker, E. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation is as effective as electroconvulsive therapy in the treatment of nondelusional major depressive disorder: an open study. Biol Psychiatry. 2000; 47(4): 314–324.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed