Efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for post-stroke depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

We aimed to conduct a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in patients with post-stroke depression (PSD). Six relevant electronic databases (PubMed, CENTRAL, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, and PsycINFO) were searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared rTMS with control condition for PSD were included. The mean change in depression symptom scores was defined as the primary efficacy outcome. Secondary outcomes included the remission rate of depression, stroke recovery, and cognitive function recovery. In total, 7 RCTs with 351 participants were included. At post-treatment, rTMS was significantly more effective than the control condition, with a standardized mean difference (SMD) of -1.15 (95%CI: -1.62 to -0.69; P<0.001, I2=71%) and remission with an odds ratio (OR) of 3.46 (95%CI: 1.68 to 7.12; P<0.001; I2=11%). As for stroke recovery, rTMS was also better than the control condition (SMD=-0.67, 95%CI: -1.02 to -0.32; P<0.001). However, no significant difference was found for cognitive function recovery between the two groups (SMD=4.07, 95%CI: -1.41 to 9.55; P=0.15). To explore the potential moderators for the primary outcome, a series of subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed. The results implied that rTMS may be more effective in Asian samples than in North American samples (P=0.03). In conclusion, from the current evidence in this study, rTMS could be an effective treatment for patients with PSD. Further clinical studies with larger sample sizes and clearer subgroup definitions are needed to confirm these outcomes.

Bilateral repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment-resistant depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

There has been concern regarding the use of controversial paradigms for repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) to manage treatment-resistant depression (TRD). This meta-analysis assessed the efficacy of bilateral rTMS compared with unilateral and sham rTMS in patients with TRD. PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, EAGLE and NTIS databases were searched to identify relevant studies, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on bilateral rTMS for TRD patients were included. The response was defined as the primary outcome, and remission was the secondary outcome. Ten RCTs that included 634 patients met the eligibility criteria. The risk ratio (RRs) of both the primary and secondary outcomes of bilateral rTMS showed non-significant increases compared to unilateral rTMS (RR=1.01, P=0.93; odds ratio [OR]=0.77, P=0.22). Notably, the RR of the primary bilateral rTMS outcome was significantly increased compared to that for sham rTMS (RR=3.43, P=0.0004). The results of our analysis demonstrated that bilateral rTMS was significantly more effective than sham rTMS but not unilateral rTMS in patients with TRD. Thus, bilateral rTMS may not be a useful paradigm for patients with TRD.

A meta-analysis of probiotics for preventing necrotizing enterocolitis in preterm neonates

Necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) is one of the most common acquired diseases of the gastrointestinal tract in preterm infants. Some randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) have indicated that probiotics may potentially lower the incidence of NEC and mortality. However, debate still remains about the safety of probiotics and their influence on normal infant growth. We performed this meta-analysis to assess the safety and benefits of probiotic supplementation in preterm infants. We searched in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases for English references, and in Wanfang, VIP, and CNKI databases for Chinese references. Ultimately, 27 RCTs (including 9 Chinese articles) were incorporated into this meta-analysis. Relative risk (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) were calculated using a random-effects or fixed-effects model, depending on the data type and heterogeneity. A total of 6655 preterm infants, including the probiotic group (n=3298) and the placebo group (n=3357), were eligible for inclusion in this meta-analysis. For Bell stage ≥I and gestational age <37 weeks, risk of NEC incidence was significantly lower in the probiotic group [RR=0.35, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.27-0.44, P<0.00001]. For Bell stage ≥II or gestational age <34 weeks, there were likewise significant differences between the probiotic and placebo groups concerning NEC incidence (RR=0.34, 95%CI=0.25-0.48, P<0.00001; and RR=0.39, 95%CI=0.27-0.56, P<0.00001). Risk of death was significantly reduced in the probiotic group (RR=0.58, 95%CI=0.46-0.75, P<0.0001). In contrast, there was no significant difference concerning the risk of sepsis (RR=0.94, 95%CI=0.83-1.06, P=0.31). With respect to weight gain and the age at which infants reached full feeds, no significant differences were found between the probiotic and placebo groups (WMD=1.07, 95%CI=−0.21-2.34, P=0.10; and WMD=−1.66, 95%CI=−3.6-0.27, P=0.09). This meta-analysis has shown that, regardless of gestational age and NEC stage, probiotic supplementation could significantly reduce the risk of NEC in preterm infants. Analysis also indicated that such supplementation did not increase the incidence risk of sepsis or of mortality. Finally, the study showed that probiotic supplementation may have no adverse effect on normal feeding and growth.