EFFICACY AND ACCEPTABILITY OF HIGH FREQUENCY REPETITIVE TRANSCRANIAL MAGNETIC STIMULATION (rTMS) VERSUS ELECTROCONVULSIVE THERAPY (ECT) FOR MAJOR DEPRESSION: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS OF RANDOMIZED TRIALS

Clinical trials comparing the efficacy and acceptability of high frequency repetitivetranscranial magneticstimulation (HF-rTMS) and electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) for treating major depression (MD) have yielded conflicting results. As this may have been the result of limited statistical power, we have carried out this meta-analysis to examine this issue. We searched the literature for randomized trials on head-to-head comparisons between HF-rTMS and ECT from January 1995 through September 2012 using MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and SCOPUS. The main outcome measures were remission rates, pre-post changes in depression ratings, as well as overall dropout rates at study end. We used a random-effects model, Odds Ratios (OR), Number Needed to Treat (NNT), and Hedges' g effect sizes. Data were obtained from 7 randomized trials, totalling 294 subjects with MD. After an average of 15.2 HF-rTMS and 8.2 ECT sessions, 33.6% (38/113) and 52% (53/102) of subjects were classified as remitters (OR = 0.46; p = 0.04), respectively. The associated NNT for remission was 6 and favoured ECT. Also, reduction of depressive symptomatology was significantly more pronounced in the ECT group (Hedges' g = -0.93; p = 0.007). No differences on dropout rates for HF-rTMS and ECT groups were found. In conclusion, ECT seems to be more effective than HF-rTMS for treating MD, although they did not differ in terms of dropout rates. Nevertheless, future comparative trials with larger sample sizes and better matching at baseline, longer follow-ups and more intense stimulation protocols are warranted. Depression and Anxiety 30: 614-623, 2013. (C) 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.