4.7 Article

Anterior cingulotomy for major depression: Clinical outcome and relationship to lesion characteristics

期刊

BIOLOGICAL PSYCHIATRY
卷 63, 期 7, 页码 670-677

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2007.07.019

关键词

anterior cingulotomy; clinical outcome; major depressive disorder; neurosurgery for mental disorder

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Anterior cingulotomy (ACING) is a neurosurgical treatment for chronic refractory depression, pain, and obsessive-compulsive disorder. Anterior cingulotomy involves the placement of bilateral lesions in the anterior cingulate under stereotactic guidance. Although a long-established therapeutic intervention, the optimal location and volume of lesions are not known, but it is generally believed that efficacious lesions interrupt the fibers of the cingulum bundle. Methods: Using T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging, we tested the hypothesis that lesions placed more anteriorly would be associated with a better clinical response. We also tested a secondary hypothesis that a superior clinical response would be associated with larger lesion volumes. Results: When assessed 12 months following surgery, a superior clinical response was associated with more anterior lesions but, unexpectedly, with smaller lesion volumes. Specifically, the best clinical response was associated with total (right plus left hemisphere) lesion volumes of 1000 to 2000 mm(3) centered at Montreal Neurological Institute (MNI) coordinates (+/- 9,19,30). Conclusions: There is considerable evidence from neuroimaging studies that more rostral areas within the anterior cingulate cortex are functionally and structurally abnormal in patients with major depressive disorder. Anteriorly placed ACING lesions would target and modify function within such regions. It should not be assumed that larger lesions are associated with a better response. These findings of relationships between lesion characteristics and clinical response argue against the suggestion that ACING represents a placebo treatment.

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

4.7
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