Adverse Effects of Deep Brain Stimulation for Treatment-Resistant Depression: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is an emerging therapy for treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Although adverse effects have been reported in early-phase and a few randomized clinical trials, little is known about its overall safety profile, which has been assumed to be similar to that of DBS for movement disorders. The objective of this study was to pool existing safety data on DBS for TRD. Following PRISMA guidelines, PubMed was searched for English articles describing adverse outcomes after DBS for TRD. Studies were included if they reported at least 5 patients with a minimal follow-up of 6 months. After abstract (n = 607) and full-article review (n = 127), 28 articles reporting on 353 patients met criteria for final inclusion. Follow-up of the studies retrieved ranged from 12 to 96 months. Hemorrhages occurred in 0.8% of patients and infections in 10.2%. The rate of completed suicide was 2.5%. Development or worsening of depressive symptoms, anxiety, and mania occurred in 18.4%, 9.1%, and 5.1%, respectively. There were some differences between targets, but between-study heterogeneity precluded statistical comparisons. In conclusion, DBS for TRD is associated with surgical and psychiatric adverse events. Hemorrhage and infection occur at rates within an accepted range for other DBS applications. The risk of suicide after DBS for TRD is 2.5% but may not represent a significant deviation from the natural history of TRD. Finally, risks of worsening depression, anxiety, and the incidence of mania should be acknowledged when considering DBS for TRD.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".