Back to Search Start Over

Efficacy and Safety of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation as an Add-on Treatment for Bipolar Depression

Authors :
Beny Lafer
Lucas Borrione
Paulo A. Lotufo
Rodrigo Machado-Vieira
Gabriel Tortella
Isabela M. Benseñor
Renerio Fraguas
Izio Klein
Adriano H. Moffa
Adriano Fernandes da Silva
Eric Cretaz
Stephan Goerigk
Andre R. Brunoni
Luana V. M. Aparicio
Wagner F. Gattaz
Bernardo Sampaio-Junior
Source :
JAMA Psychiatry. 75:158
Publication Year :
2018
Publisher :
American Medical Association (AMA), 2018.

Abstract

Importance More effective, tolerable interventions for bipolar depression treatment are needed. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a novel therapeutic modality with few severe adverse events that showed promising results for unipolar depression. Objective To determine the efficacy and safety of tDCS as an add-on treatment for bipolar depression. Design, Setting, and Participants A randomized, sham-controlled, double-blind trial (the Bipolar Depression Electrical Treatment Trial [BETTER]) was conducted from July 1, 2014, to March 30, 2016, at an outpatient, single-center academic setting. Participants included 59 adults with type I or II bipolar disorder in a major depressive episode and receiving a stable pharmacologic regimen with 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-17) scores higher than 17. Data were analyzed in the intention-to-treat sample. Interventions Ten daily 30-minute, 2-mA, anodal-left and cathodal-right prefrontal sessions of active or sham tDCS on weekdays and then 1 session every fortnight until week 6. Main Outcomes and Measures Change in HDRS-17 scores at week 6. Results Fifty-nine patients (40 [68%] women), with a mean (SD) age of 45.9 (12) years participated; 36 (61%) with bipolar I and 23 (39%) with bipolar II disorder were randomized and 52 finished the trial. In the intention-to-treat analysis, patients in the active tDCS condition showed significantly superior improvement compared with those receiving sham (β int = −1.68; number needed to treat, 5.8; 95% CI, 3.3-25.8; P = .01). Cumulative response rates were higher in the active vs sham groups (67.6% vs 30.4%; number needed to treat, 2.69; 95% CI, 1.84-4.99; P = .01), but not remission rates (37.4% vs 19.1%; number needed to treat, 5.46; 95% CI, 3.38-14.2; P = .18). Adverse events, including treatment-emergent affective switches, were similar between groups, except for localized skin redness that was higher in the active group (54% vs 19%; P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance In this trial, tDCS was an effective, safe, and tolerable add-on intervention for this small bipolar depression sample. Further trials should examine tDCS efficacy in a larger sample. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier:NCT02152878

Details

ISSN :
2168622X and 02152878
Volume :
75
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
JAMA Psychiatry
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....78b7b9b09e73995a3b651ab934ee66da
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2017.4040