4.2 Article

Accelerated HF-rTMS in treatment-resistant unipolar depression: Insights from subgenual anterior cingulate functional connectivity

期刊

WORLD JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL PSYCHIATRY
卷 15, 期 4, 页码 286-297

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.3109/15622975.2013.872295

关键词

HF-rTMS; major depression; treatment-resistance; subgenual anterior cingulate cortex; functional connectivity

资金

  1. Scientific Fund W. Gepts UZBrussel
  2. Ghent University Multidisciplinary Research Partnership The integrative neuroscience of behavioral control
  3. [BOF10/GOA/014]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives. Intensified repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) applied to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) may result in fast clinical responses in treatment resistant depression (TRD). In these kinds of patients, subgenual anterior cingulate cortex (sgACC) functional connectivity (FC) seems to be consistently disturbed. So far, no de novo data on the relationship between sgACC FC changes and clinical efficacy of accelerated rTMS were available. Methods. Twenty unipolar TRD patients, all at least stage III treatment resistant, were recruited in a randomized sham-controlled crossover high-frequency (HF)-rTMS treatment study. Resting-state (rs) functional MRI scans were collected at baseline and at the end of treatment. Results. HF-rTMS responders showed significantly stronger resting-state functional connectivity (rsFC) anti-correlation between the sgACC and parts of the left superior medial prefrontal cortex. After successful treatment an inverted relative strength of the anti-correlations was observed in the perigenual prefrontal cortex (pgPFC). No effects on sgACC rsFC were observed in non-responders. Conclusions. Strong rsFC anti-correlation between the sgACC and parts of the left prefrontal cortex could be indicative of a beneficial outcome. Accelerated HF-rTMS treatment designs have the potential to acutely adjust deregulated sgACC neuronal networks in TRD patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据