RESUMO
Objective@#Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is characterized by increased inflammatory processing and altered brain volume. In this study, we investigated the relationship between inflammatory markers and brain volume in patients with PTSD. @*Methods@#Forty-five patients with PTSD, and 70 healthy controls (HC) completed clinical assessments and self-reported psychopathology scales. Factors associated with inflammatory responses including brain-derived neurotrophic factor and four inflammatory biomarkers (C-reactive protein, cortisol, Interleukin-6, and homocysteine) and T1-magnetic resonance imaging of the brain were measured. @*Results@#In the PTSD group, cortisol level was significantly lower (t = 2.438, p = 0.046) than that of the HC. Cortisol level was significantly negatively correlated with the left thalamus proper (r = −0.369, p = 0.035), right thalamus proper (r = −0.394, p = 0.014), right frontal pole (r = −0.348, p = 0.039), left occipital pole (r = −0.338, p = 0.044), and right superior occipital gyrus (r = −0.397, p = 0.008) in patients with PTSD. However, these significant correlations were not observed in HC. @*Conclusion@#Our results indicate that increased cortisol level, even though its average level was lower than that of HC, is associated with smaller volumes of the thalamus, right frontal pole, left occipital pole, and right superior occipital gyrus in patients with PTSD. Cortisol, a major stress hormone, might be a reliable biomarker to brain volumes and pathophysiological pathways in patients with PTSD.
RESUMO
Given the long history, the field of electroceutical and bioelectric therapy has grown impressively, recognized as the main modality of mental health treatments along with psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy. Electroceutical and bioelectric therapy comprises electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), deep brain stimulation (DBS), transcranial electrical stimulation (tES), and other brain stimulation techniques. Much empirical research has been published regarding the application guidelines, mechanism of action, and efficacy of respective brain stimulation techniques, but no comparative study that delineates the advantages and limitations of each therapy exists for a comprehensive understanding of each technique. This review provides a comparison of existing electroceutical and bioelectric techniques, primarily focusing on the therapeutic advantages and limitations of each therapy in the current electroceutical and bioelectric field.