MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3208950601 · doi:10.1111/pcn.13308

Is increasing the pulse width from 0.5 to 1 ms an effective strategy to optimize clinical and electrical outcomes in bilateral <scp>ECT</scp> treatment?

2021· letter· en· W3208950601 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Clara Massaneda‐Tuneu, Laura Martínez‐Fernandez, Aida de Arriba‐Arnau, Virginia Soria, Mikel Urretavizcaya

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences · 2021
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicElectroconvulsive Therapy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectroconvulsive therapyPulse (music)Clinical PracticeMajor depressive disorderBipolar disorderMedicinePsychologyCognitionPsychiatryPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Different approaches have been implemented in electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) to optimize the treatment and to individualize it to every patient's needs. Recently, there has been an increased interest in considering changes within the technique in order to reduce cognitive side effects while maintaining clinical efficacy. There is evidence that ultra-brief pulses (UBPs) have a better effect at preserving cognition1 but need higher suprathreshold dosages2 and number of treatment sessions to maintain efficacy3, 4 compared to longer pulse widths (PW). However, some case reports have suggested that lengthening the PW might result in improvement in some patients who have an inappropriate seizure or insufficient response with a shorter PW.5, 6 Thus, is PW reduction appropriate for everyone? Could patients who do not respond to shorter pulse widths benefit from a shift to longer pulses in the brief pulses (BPs) range? In our daily practice we also observed that some patients who responded inappropriately to 0.5 milliseconds (ms) PW, did better with 1.0 ms PW. So, we aimed to study the individual clinical evolution of patients who underwent a change from 0.5 to 1 ms PW during the same acute ECT course. We collected retrospectively 12 patients with a diagnosis of major depressive episode, either bipolar or unipolar, according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) and analyzed their individual evolution after shifting the PW from 0.5 to 1 ms during the same course of acute treatment with bilateral ECT (details in Appendix S1). The concurrent psychiatric treatment remained unchanged when performing ECT. Clinical status was measured at baseline and after the last session of ECT using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) and by clinical evaluation before every session by the patients' treating psychiatrist. The seizure adequacy markers index7 that summarizes five ictal parameters was used to evaluate the seizure quality (Table S1 and Fig. S1). The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA) was used to evaluate any cognitive side effects of ECT. All the patients included in the study signed a written informed consent. All the patients included in the study were administered minimum but safe anesthesia dosage, individualized stimulus energy and hyperventilation during the sessions to facilitate outcomes; nevertheless, they still showed difficulties maintaining adequate seizure elicitation or responding clinically. Based on the criteria of the patient's treating psychiatrist, the patients received a change in PW from 0.5 to 1 ms in order to improve seizure quality parameters and optimize clinical response. Study population characteristics are found in Table S2. Table S3 reports all the patient's data on ECT parameters, treatment clinical and tolerance outcomes during the acute ECT course with both PW. All cases responded positively to the change in the PW from 0.5 to 1 ms, achieving an improvement in the electroencephalographic parameters (based on the seizure adequacy markers index)7 as well as clinical outcome. Eight patients achieved remission (75%) after switching to 1 ms PW, and three patients achieved partial clinical response (25%). During the sessions following the change to 1 ms PW, half of the patients needed to have their stimulus intensity raised. In just one case, a confusional syndrome appeared after the first 1 ms session. No other complications associated with the treatment were recorded. Even though there is a general trend to shorten PW, there is a lack of consensus in this field8 and most of the available studies used unilateral ECT, while in our study patients underwent bilateral (BL) ECT. In BL ECT, a study that found relatively lower efficacy of UBP raised controversy,9 but this finding was not replicated in subsequent studies.1, 3, 4, 10 The present study findings are in concordance with some case reports that have suggested that lengthening the PW might result in improvement in some patients who have an inappropriate seizure or insufficient response with shorter PW (UBP).5, 6 A prolonged chronaxie and the effect of wider PW to activate broader regions of brain tissue6 have been proposed as explanatory hypotheses for these findings. In conclusion, these observations lead us to hypothesize that lengthening the PW from 0.5 to 1 ms in patients undergoing bilateral ECT for a depressive episode could be a useful strategy to consider in certain groups of patients with poor-quality electroencephalographic parameters and scarce clinical improvement. However, further research with larger samples and randomized clinical trials are warranted to demonstrate this clinical observation. Such research ought to identify if lengthening the PW should be considered an optimization strategy in ECT. We thank all the patients and staff from the ECT Unit of Bellvitge University Hospital. We thank the CERCA Programme/Generalitat de Catalunya for institutional support. This research did not receive any grants/support from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors for the submitted work. The authors declare no conflict of interest. Appendix S1. Supporting information (detailed methods, results and limitations). Figure S1. EEG representative waveform according to the seizure parameters evaluated by Seizure adequacy Score. Table S1. Seizure adequacy markers index according to the proposal of Minelli et al. Table S2. Characteristics of the sample. Table S3. Clinical characteristics, ECT parameters used and treatment outcome, including clinical response and tolerance, for each case in the sample. Please note: The publisher is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.463
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.340 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychiatry and Clinical NeurosciencesSame topicElectroconvulsive Therapy StudiesFrench-language works237,207