-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
Comparison of ultra-ultrabrief and ultrabrief pulse widths in right unilateral electroconvulsive therapy: A randomized trial
J. Žaludová Heidingerová, J. Albrecht, M. Anders, D. Divácký, G. Jirečková, T. Le Hong, T. Mareš, V. Čapek, HA. Sackeim, J. Buday
Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, randomizované kontrolované studie, srovnávací studie
- MeSH
- dospělí MeSH
- elektrokonvulzívní terapie * metody škodlivé účinky MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- výsledek terapie MeSH
- záchvaty terapie MeSH
- Check Tag
- dospělí MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mužské pohlaví MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- randomizované kontrolované studie MeSH
- srovnávací studie MeSH
BACKGROUND: Ultrabrief stimulation in electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) using a 0.25 or 0.30 ms pulse width markedly reduces the charge required to reach the seizure threshold (ST) and cognitive side effects. It is not known whether further reduction of pulse width to 0.15 ms is advantageous. METHODS: Thirty-seven patients were randomized to ST titration at the first session applying right unilateral (RUL) ECT with either a 0.15 or 0.30 ms pulse width and were titrated again in the second session using the alternative pulse width. All subsequent treatments used the pulse width applied in the second titration session, administering RUL ECT, starting at 6xST. The primary outcome was difference between the pulse widths in ST at the two titration sessions. Exploratory analyses examined differences in seizure duration and postictal time to recover orientation (TRO), averaged across all ECT sessions from the third onwards. Other exploratory analyses examined clinical improvement and retrograde amnesia for autobiographical information and other neuropsychological functions following the ECT course. RESULTS: In the first titration session, ST was significantly lower with the 0.15 ms than 0.30 ms pulse width. ST significantly increased when re-titrating with the 0.30 ms pulse width and significantly decreased when re-titrating with a 0.15 ms pulse width. There were no differences between the pulse width groups in clinical improvement, TRO, or neuropsychological measures. CONCLUSIONS: Ultra-ultrabrief stimulation with a 0.15 ms pulse width is more efficient in seizure induction than a 0.30 ms pulse width. Comprehensive studies should determine whether ultra-ultrabrief stimulation replaces ultrabrief stimulation as a default parameter for ECT.
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc25015947
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20250731091357.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 250708s2025 xxu f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1016/j.brs.2025.02.017 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)39988121
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a xxu
- 100 1_
- $a Žaludová Heidingerová, Jana $u Department of Psychiatry, Charles University, General University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
- 245 10
- $a Comparison of ultra-ultrabrief and ultrabrief pulse widths in right unilateral electroconvulsive therapy: A randomized trial / $c J. Žaludová Heidingerová, J. Albrecht, M. Anders, D. Divácký, G. Jirečková, T. Le Hong, T. Mareš, V. Čapek, HA. Sackeim, J. Buday
- 520 9_
- $a BACKGROUND: Ultrabrief stimulation in electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) using a 0.25 or 0.30 ms pulse width markedly reduces the charge required to reach the seizure threshold (ST) and cognitive side effects. It is not known whether further reduction of pulse width to 0.15 ms is advantageous. METHODS: Thirty-seven patients were randomized to ST titration at the first session applying right unilateral (RUL) ECT with either a 0.15 or 0.30 ms pulse width and were titrated again in the second session using the alternative pulse width. All subsequent treatments used the pulse width applied in the second titration session, administering RUL ECT, starting at 6xST. The primary outcome was difference between the pulse widths in ST at the two titration sessions. Exploratory analyses examined differences in seizure duration and postictal time to recover orientation (TRO), averaged across all ECT sessions from the third onwards. Other exploratory analyses examined clinical improvement and retrograde amnesia for autobiographical information and other neuropsychological functions following the ECT course. RESULTS: In the first titration session, ST was significantly lower with the 0.15 ms than 0.30 ms pulse width. ST significantly increased when re-titrating with the 0.30 ms pulse width and significantly decreased when re-titrating with a 0.15 ms pulse width. There were no differences between the pulse width groups in clinical improvement, TRO, or neuropsychological measures. CONCLUSIONS: Ultra-ultrabrief stimulation with a 0.15 ms pulse width is more efficient in seizure induction than a 0.30 ms pulse width. Comprehensive studies should determine whether ultra-ultrabrief stimulation replaces ultrabrief stimulation as a default parameter for ECT.
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 12
- $a elektrokonvulzívní terapie $x metody $x škodlivé účinky $7 D004565
- 650 _2
- $a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
- 650 _2
- $a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
- 650 _2
- $a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
- 650 _2
- $a senioři $7 D000368
- 650 _2
- $a dospělí $7 D000328
- 650 _2
- $a výsledek terapie $7 D016896
- 650 _2
- $a záchvaty $x terapie $7 D012640
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _2
- $a randomizované kontrolované studie $7 D016449
- 655 _2
- $a srovnávací studie $7 D003160
- 700 1_
- $a Albrecht, Jakub $u University Department of Psychiatry Faculty of Health Studies Jan Evangelista Purkyně University and Department of Psychiatry Most, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Anders, Martin $u Department of Psychiatry, Charles University, General University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Divácký, Daniel $u Department of Psychiatry, Charles University, General University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Jirečková, Gabriela $u Department of Psychiatry, Charles University, General University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Le Hong, Thai $u Department of Psychiatry, Charles University, General University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Mareš, Tadeáš $u Department of Psychiatry, Charles University, General University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Čapek, Václav $u Department of Psychiatry, Charles University, General University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Sackeim, Harold A $u Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA
- 700 1_
- $a Buday, Jozef $u Department of Psychiatry, Charles University, General University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic. Electronic address: jozef.buday@vfn.cz
- 773 0_
- $w MED00166625 $t Brain stimulation $x 1876-4754 $g Roč. 18, č. 3 (2025), s. 838-847
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39988121 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20250708 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20250731091352 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 2366648 $s 1253072
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC-MEDLINE
- BMC __
- $a 2025 $b 18 $c 3 $d 838-847 $e 20250221 $i 1876-4754 $m Brain stimulation $n Brain Stimul $x MED00166625
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20250708