Real world effectiveness of maintenance ketamine infusions for treatment-resistant depression in major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Antidepressant effects with sub-anesthetic doses of intravenous ketamine have been previously demonstrated. However, previous studies have primarily evaluated the efficacy of acute treatment protocols, with limited research on maintenance treatment. Moreover, controlled maintenance studies have only included patients with treatment-resistant Major Depressive Disorder (TRD), with no maintenance studies evaluating effects in bipolar disorder. Herein, we report the first study to evaluate maintenance ketamine infusions in patients with treatment-resistant bipolar depression (TRBD), in addition to a sample of patients with TRD. A retrospective chart review of patients receiving ketamine infusions from a community treatment centre was conducted. 110 TRD and 25 TRBD patients were included, all of whom responded to an acute course of ketamine infusions and later received maintenance infusions. Linear mixed models found that depression and suicidality scores, as measured by the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS-SR16) assessment, were significantly decreased after an acute course of ketamine infusions, with improvements persisting while patients continued to receive maintenance infusions over several weeks and months. Similar observations were seen after analyzing weekly patient-reported clinical global impression scores. Ketamine was determined to be relatively safe, with zero cases of suicidal behaviour and addiction behaviour throughout treatment. One patient (4 %) diagnosed with TRBD underwent affective switching, with no further tolerability concerns following stabilization. These results provide preliminary support for the long-term clinical utility of maintenance ketamine infusions.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".