Ketamine vs Electroconvulsive Therapy for Treatment-Resistant Depression: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The ELEKT-D: Electroconvulsive Therapy (ECT) vs Ketamine in Patients With Treatment Resistant Depression (TRD) (ELEKT-D) trial demonstrated noninferiority of intravenous ketamine vs ECT for nonpsychotic TRD. Clinical features that can guide selection of ketamine vs ECT may inform shared decision-making for patients with TRD. Objective: To evaluate whether selected clinical features were associated with differential improvement with ketamine vs ECT. Design, Setting, and Participants: This secondary analysis of an open-label noninferiority randomized clinical trial was a multicenter study conducted at 5 US academic medical centers from April 7, 2017, to November 11, 2022. Analyses for this study, which were not prespecified in the trial protocol, were conducted from May 10 to Oct 31, 2023. The study cohort included patients with TRD, aged 21 to 75 years, who were in a current nonpsychotic depressive episode of at least moderate severity and were referred for ECT by their clinicians. Exposures: Eligible participants were randomized 1:1 to receive either 6 infusions of ketamine or 9 treatments with ECT over 3 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: Association between baseline factors (including 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology Self-Report [QIDS-SR16], Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS], premorbid intelligence, cognitive function, history of attempted suicide, and inpatient vs outpatient status) and treatment response were assessed with repeated measures mixed-effects model analyses. Results: Among the 365 participants included in this study (mean [SD] age, 46.0 [14.5] years; 191 [52.3%] female), 195 were randomized to the ketamine group and 170 to the ECT group. In repeated measures mixed-effects models using depression levels over 3 weeks and after false discovery rate adjustment, participants with a baseline QIDS-SR16 score of 20 or less (-7.7 vs -5.6 points) and those starting treatment as outpatients (-8.4 vs -6.2 points) reported greater reduction in the QIDS-SR16 with ketamine vs ECT. Conversely, those with a baseline QIDS-SR16 score of more than 20 (ie, very severe depression) and starting treatment as inpatients reported greater reduction in the QIDS-SR16 earlier in course of treatment (-8.4 vs -6.7 points) with ECT, but scores were similar in both groups at the end-of-treatment visit (-9.0 vs -9.9 points). In the ECT group only, participants with higher scores on measures of premorbid intelligence (-14.0 vs -11.2 points) and with a comorbid posttraumatic stress disorder diagnosis (-16.6 vs -12.0 points) reported greater reduction in the MADRS score. Those with impaired memory recall had greater reduction in MADRS during the second week of treatment (-13.4 vs -9.6 points), but the levels of MADRS were similar to those with unimpaired recall at the end-of-treatment visit (-14.3 vs -12.2 points). Other results were not significant after false discovery rate adjustment. Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of the ELEKT-D randomized clinical trial of ECT vs ketamine, greater improvement in depression was observed with intravenous ketamine among outpatients with nonpsychotic TRD who had moderately severe or severe depression, suggesting that these patients may consider ketamine over ECT for TRD.

Ketamine versus ECT for Nonpsychotic Treatment-Resistant Major Depression.

BACKGROUND: Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) and subanesthetic intravenous ketamine are both currently used for treatment-resistant major depression, but the comparative effectiveness of the two treatments remains uncertain. METHODS: We conducted an open-label, randomized, noninferiority trial involving patients referred to ECT clinics for treatment-resistant major depression. Patients with treatment-resistant major depression without psychosis were recruited and assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive ketamine or ECT. During an initial 3-week treatment phase, patients received either ECT three times per week or ketamine (0.5 mg per kilogram of body weight over 40 minutes) twice per week. The primary outcome was a response to treatment (i.e., a decrease of ≥50% from baseline in the score on the 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report; scores range from 0 to 27, with higher scores indicating greater depression). The noninferiority margin was -10 percentage points. Secondary outcomes included scores on memory tests and patient-reported quality of life. After the initial treatment phase, the patients who had a response were followed over a 6-month period. RESULTS: A total of 403 patients underwent randomization at five clinical sites; 200 patients were assigned to the ketamine group and 203 to the ECT group. After 38 patients had withdrawn before initiation of the assigned treatment, ketamine was administered to 195 patients and ECT to 170 patients. A total of 55.4% of the patients in the ketamine group and 41.2% of those in the ECT group had a response (difference, 14.2 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 3.9 to 24.2; P<0.001 for the noninferiority of ketamine to ECT). ECT appeared to be associated with a decrease in memory recall after 3 weeks of treatment (mean [±SE] decrease in the T-score for delayed recall on the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised, -0.9±1.1 in the ketamine group vs. -9.7±1.2 in the ECT group; scores range from -300 to 200, with higher scores indicating better function) with gradual recovery during follow-up. Improvement in patient-reported quality-of-life was similar in the two trial groups. ECT was associated with musculoskeletal adverse effects, whereas ketamine was associated with dissociation. CONCLUSIONS: Ketamine was noninferior to ECT as therapy for treatment-resistant major depression without psychosis. (Funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute; ELEKT-D ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03113968.).

Future directions in psychiatric neurosurgery: Proceedings of the 2022 American Society for Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery meeting on surgical neuromodulation for psychiatric disorders.

OBJECTIVE: Despite advances in the treatment of psychiatric diseases, currently available therapies do not provide sufficient and durable relief for as many as 30-40% of patients. Neuromodulation, including deep brain stimulation (DBS), has emerged as a potential therapy for persistent disabling disease, however it has not yet gained widespread adoption. In 2016, the American Society for Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery (ASSFN) convened a meeting with leaders in the field to discuss a roadmap for the path forward. A follow-up meeting in 2022 aimed to review the current state of the field and to identify critical barriers and milestones for progress. DESIGN: The ASSFN convened a meeting on June 3, 2022 in Atlanta, Georgia and included leaders from the fields of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry along with colleagues from industry, government, ethics, and law. The goal was to review the current state of the field, assess for advances or setbacks in the interim six years, and suggest a future path forward. The participants focused on five areas of interest: interdisciplinary engagement, regulatory pathways and trial design, disease biomarkers, ethics of psychiatric surgery, and resource allocation/prioritization. The proceedings are summarized here. CONCLUSION: The field of surgical psychiatry has made significant progress since our last expert meeting. Although weakness and threats to the development of novel surgical therapies exist, the identified strengths and opportunities promise to move the field through methodically rigorous and biologically-based approaches. The experts agree that ethics, law, patient engagement, and multidisciplinary teams will be critical to any potential growth in this area.

Double blind randomized controlled trial of deep brain stimulation for obsessive-compulsive disorder: Clinical trial design.

Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), a leading cause of disability, affects ~1-2% of the population, and can be distressing and disabling. About 1/3 of individuals demonstrate poor responsiveness to conventional treatments. A small proportion of these individuals may be deep brain stimulation (DBS) candidates. Candidacy is assessed through a multidisciplinary process including assessment of illness severity, chronicity, and functional impact. Optimization failure, despite multiple treatments, is critical during screening. Few patients nationwide are eligible for OCD DBS and thus a multi-center approach was necessary to obtain adequate sample size. The study was conducted over a six-year period and was a NIH-funded, eight-center sham-controlled trial of DBS targeting the ventral capsule/ventral striatum (VC/VS) region. There were 269 individuals who initially contacted the sites, in order to achieve 27 participants enrolled. Study enrollment required extensive review for eligibility, which was overseen by an independent advisory board. Disabling OCD had to be persistent for ≥5 years despite exhaustive medication and behavioral treatment. The final cohort was derived from a detailed consent process that included consent monitoring. Mean illness duration was 27.2 years. OCD symptom subtypes and psychiatric comorbidities varied, but all had severe disability with impaired quality of life and functioning. Participants were randomized to receive sham or active DBS for three months. Following this period, all participants received active DBS. Treatment assignment was masked to participants and raters and assessments were blinded. The final sample was consistent in demographic characteristics and clinical features when compared to other contemporary published prospective studies of OCD DBS. We report the clinical trial design, methods, and general demographics of this OCD DBS sample.

Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Correlates of Ventral Striatal Deep Brain Stimulation for Poststroke Pain.

OBJECTIVE: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) for pain has largely been implemented in an uncontrolled manner to target the somatosensory component of pain, with research leading to mixed results. We have previously shown that patients with poststroke pain syndrome who were treated with DBS targeting the ventral striatum/anterior limb of the internal capsule (VS/ALIC) demonstrated a significant improvement in measures related to the affective sphere of pain. In this study, we sought to determine how DBS targeting the VS/ALIC modifies brain activation in response to pain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five patients with poststroke pain syndrome who were blinded to DBS status (ON/OFF) and six age- and sex-matched healthy controls underwent functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) measuring blood oxygen level-dependent activation in a block design. In this design, each participant received heat stimuli to the affected or unaffected wrist area. Statistical comparisons were performed using fMRI z-maps. RESULTS: In response to pain, patients in the DBS OFF state showed significant activation (p < 0.001) in the same regions as healthy controls (thalamus, insula, and operculum) and in additional regions (orbitofrontal and superior convexity cortical areas). DBS significantly reduced activation of these additional regions and introduced foci of significant inhibitory activation (p < 0.001) in the hippocampi when painful stimulation was applied to the affected side. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that DBS of the VS/ALIC modulates affective neural networks.

ELEctroconvulsive therapy (ECT) vs. Ketamine in patients with Treatment-resistant Depression: The ELEKT-D study protocol.

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is the most common mental illness and the leading cause of disability worldwide. Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is the most effective treatment for MDD and the gold-standard therapy for treatment-resistant depression (TRD), yet it remains underutilized due to factors such as limited availability, stigma, and concerns about cognitive side effects. Ketamine has emerged as the first rapid-acting antidepressant and shows robust short-term efficacy in clinical trials, but there are concerns about its long-term safety and efficacy. While response rates are similar between ECT and ketamine in clinical trials, these treatments have never been compared head-to-head in a sufficiently large, well-powered randomized study. Here we describe the study protocol for ELEctroconvulsive therapy (ECT) vs. Ketamine in patients with Treatment-resistant Depression (ELEKT-D), a non-inferiority, comparative effectiveness trial. Patients with TRD seeking clinical treatment are randomized (1:1) to receive ECT (thrice weekly) or intravenous ketamine (twice weekly) for 3-5 weeks. The primary outcome is the proportion of responders in each group at the end of study visit, as measured by a patient-reported outcome measure (Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self Report). The study is powered such that the non-inferiority margin allows for ketamine to retain 90% of the ECT treatment effect, with a projected sample size of 400 patients (200 per group). Secondary outcomes include remission rates, depression severity, cognitive functioning, quality of life, adverse events, and tolerability. The results of the ELEKT-D study will have important implications for patient choice, clinical practice, and health insurance policies.

Automated Affect Detection in Deep Brain Stimulation for Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: A Pilot Study.

Automated measurement of affective behavior in psychopathology has been limited primarily to screening and diagnosis. While useful, clinicians more often are concerned with whether patients are improving in response to treatment. Are symptoms abating, is affect becoming more positive, are unanticipated side effects emerging? When treatment includes neural implants, need for objective, repeatable biometrics tied to neurophysiology becomes especially pressing. We used automated face analysis to assess treatment response to deep brain stimulation (DBS) in two patients with intractable obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). One was assessed intraoperatively following implantation and activation of the DBS device. The other was assessed three months post-implantation. Both were assessed during DBS on and o conditions. Positive and negative valence were quantified using a CNN trained on normative data of 160 non-OCD participants. Thus, a secondary goal was domain transfer of the classifiers. In both contexts, DBS-on resulted in marked positive affect. In response to DBS-off, affect flattened in both contexts and alternated with increased negative affect in the outpatient setting. Mean AUC for domain transfer was 0.87. These findings suggest that parametric variation of DBS is strongly related to affective behavior and may introduce vulnerability for negative affect in the event that DBS is discontinued.

Closing the Loop on Deep Brain Stimulation for Treatment-Resistant Depression.

Major depressive episodes are the largest cause of psychiatric disability, and can often resist treatment with medication and psychotherapy. Advances in the understanding of the neural circuit basis of depression, combined with the success of deep brain stimulation (DBS) in movement disorders, spurred several groups to test DBS for treatment-resistant depression. Multiple brain sites have now been stimulated in open-label and blinded studies. Initial open-label results were dramatic, but follow-on controlled/blinded clinical trials produced inconsistent results, with both successes and failures to meet endpoints. Data from follow-on studies suggest that this is because DBS in these trials was not targeted to achieve physiologic responses. We review these results within a technology-lifecycle framework, in which these early trial "failures" are a natural consequence of over-enthusiasm for an immature technology. That framework predicts that from this "valley of disillusionment," DBS may be nearing a "slope of enlightenment." Specifically, by combining recent mechanistic insights and the maturing technology of brain-computer interfaces (BCI), the next generation of trials will be better able to target pathophysiology. Key to that will be the development of closed-loop systems that semi-autonomously alter stimulation strategies based on a patient's individual phenotype. Such next-generation DBS approaches hold great promise for improving psychiatric care.

Deep brain stimulation of the ventral striatal area for poststroke pain syndrome: a magnetoencephalography study.

Poststroke pain syndrome (PSPS) is an often intractable disorder characterized by hemiparesis associated with unrelenting chronic pain. Although traditional analgesics have largely failed, integrative approaches targeting affective-cognitive spheres have started to show promise. Recently, we demonstrated that deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the ventral striatal area significantly improved the affective sphere of pain in patients with PSPS. In the present study, we examined whether electrophysiological correlates of pain anticipation were modulated by DBS that could serve as signatures of treatment effects. We recorded event-related fields (ERFs) of pain anticipation using magnetoencephalography (MEG) in 10 patients with PSPS preoperatively and postoperatively in DBS OFF and ON states. Simple visual cues evoked anticipation as patients awaited a painful (PS) or nonpainful stimulus (NPS) to the nonaffected or affected extremity. Preoperatively, ERFs showed no difference between PS and NPS anticipation to the affected extremity, possibly due to loss of salience in a network saturated by pain experience. DBS significantly modulated the early N1, consistent with improvements in affective networks involving restoration of salience and discrimination capacity. Additionally, DBS suppressed the posterior P2 (aberrant anticipatory anxiety) while enhancing the anterior N1 (cognitive and emotional regulation) in responders. DBS-induced changes in ERFs could potentially serve as signatures for clinical outcomes. NEW & NOTEWORTHY We examined the electrophysiological correlates of pain affect in poststroke pain patients who underwent deep brain stimulation (DBS) targeting the ventral striatal area under a randomized, controlled trial. DBS significantly modulated early event-related components, particularly N1 and P2, measured with magnetoencephalography during a pain anticipatory task, compared with baseline and the DBS-OFF condition, pointing to possible mechanisms of action. DBS-induced changes in event-related fields could potentially serve as biomarkers for clinical outcomes.

Charting the road forward in psychiatric neurosurgery: proceedings of the 2016 American Society for Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery workshop on neuromodulation for psychiatric disorders.

OBJECTIVE: Refractory psychiatric disease is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, and there is a great need for new treatments. In the last decade, investigators piloted novel deep brain stimulation (DBS)-based therapies for depression and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). Results from recent pivotal trials of these therapies, however, did not demonstrate the degree of efficacy expected from previous smaller trials. To discuss next steps, neurosurgeons, neurologists, psychiatrists and representatives from industry convened a workshop sponsored by the American Society for Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery in Chicago, Illinois, in June of 2016. DESIGN: Here we summarise the proceedings of the workshop. Participants discussed a number of issues of importance to the community. First, we discussed how to interpret results from the recent pivotal trials of DBS for OCD and depression. We then reviewed what can be learnt from lesions and closed-loop neurostimulation. Subsequently, representatives from the National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration and industry discussed their views on neuromodulation for psychiatric disorders. In particular, these third parties discussed their criteria for moving forward with new trials. Finally, we discussed the best way of confirming safety and efficacy of these therapies, including registries and clinical trial design. We close by discussing next steps in the journey to new neuromodulatory therapies for these devastating illnesses. CONCLUSION: Interest and motivation remain strong for deep brain stimulation for psychiatric disease. Progress will require coordinated efforts by all stakeholders.

Closing the Loop on Deep Brain Stimulation for Treatment-Resistant Depression.

(Reprinted with permission from Frontiers of Neuroscience, 12:175. Copyright © 2018 Widge, Malone, and Dougherty).

Randomized clinical trial of deep brain stimulation for poststroke pain.

OBJECTIVE: The experience with deep brain stimulation (DBS) for pain is largely based on uncontrolled studies targeting the somatosensory pathways, with mixed results. We hypothesized that targeting limbic neural pathways would modulate the affective sphere of pain and alleviate suffering. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover study of DBS targeting the ventral striatum/anterior limb of the internal capsule (VS/ALIC) in 10 patients with poststroke pain syndrome. One month after bilateral DBS, patients were randomized to active DBS or sham for 3 months, followed by crossover for another 3-month period. The primary endpoint was a ≥50% improvement on the Pain Disability Index in 50% of patients with active DBS compared to sham. This 6-month blinded phase was followed by an 18-month open stimulation phase. RESULTS: Nine participants completed randomization. Although this trial was negative for its primary and secondary endpoints, we did observe significant differences in multiple outcome measures related to the affective sphere of pain (eg, Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Beck Depression Inventory, Affective Pain Rating Index of the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire). Fourteen serious adverse events were recorded and resolved. INTERPRETATION: VS/ALIC DBS to modulate the affective sphere of pain represents a paradigm shift in chronic pain management. Although this exploratory study was negative for its primary endpoint, VS/ALIC DBS demonstrated an acceptable safety profile and statistically significant improvements on multiple outcome measures related to the affective sphere of pain. Therefore, we believe these results justify further work on neuromodulation therapies targeting the affective sphere of pain. Ann Neurol 2017;81:653-663.

Cognitive outcome after ventral capsule/ventral striatum stimulation for treatment-resistant major depression.

BACKGROUND: We report the neuropsychological outcome of 25 patients with treatment-resistant major depressive disorder (TRD) who participated in an Institutional Review Board (IRB)-approved randomised double-blind trial comparing active to sham deep brain stimulation (DBS) in the anterior limb of the ventral capsule/ventral striatum (VC/VS). METHODS: Participants were randomised to active (n=12) versus sham (n=13) DBS for 16 weeks. Data were analysed at the individual and group levels. Group differences were analysed using repeated measures ANOVAs. Relationships between depression severity and cognition were examined using partial correlations. The false discovery rate method controlled for multiple analyses. RESULTS: No significant interactions comparing active versus sham stimulation over time were evident. Change in depression was unrelated to change in neuropsychological measures. Twenty patients declined by ≥1 SD on at least one measure (41.3% of declines occurred in active group participants; 63.0% in older participants regardless of stimulation status). Twenty-two patients exhibited improvements >1 SD on neuropsychological measures (47.7% in the active group; 63.1% in younger participants). CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that VC/VS DBS in patients with TRD does not significantly affect neuropsychological function. Age at surgery, regardless of stimulation status, may be related to cognitive outcome at the individual patient level. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00837486; Results.

A Randomized Sham-Controlled Trial of Deep Brain Stimulation of the Ventral Capsule/Ventral Striatum for Chronic Treatment-Resistant Depression.

BACKGROUND: Multiple open-label trials of deep brain stimulation (DBS) for treatment-resistant depression (TRD), including those targeting the ventral capsule/ventral striatum target, have shown encouraging response rates. However, no randomized controlled trials of DBS for TRD have been published. METHODS: Thirty patients with TRD participated in a sham-controlled trial of DBS at the ventral capsule/ventral striatum target for TRD. Patients were randomized to active versus sham DBS treatment in a blinded fashion for 16 weeks, followed by an open-label continuation phase. The primary outcome measure was response, defined as a 50% or greater improvement on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale from baseline. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in response rates between the active (3 of 15 subjects; 20%) and control (2 of 14 subjects; 14.3%) treatment arms and no significant difference between change in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale scores as a continuous measure upon completion of the 16-week controlled phase of the trial. The response rates at 12, 18, and 24 months during the open-label continuation phase were 20%, 26.7%, and 23.3%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The results of this first randomized controlled study of DBS for the treatment of TRD did not demonstrate a significant difference in response rates between the active and control groups at the end of the 16-week controlled phase. However, a range of 20% to 26.7% of patients did achieve response at any time during the open-label continuation phase. Future studies, perhaps utilizing alternative study designs and stimulation parameters, are needed.

A comprehensive review of the use of deep brain stimulation (DBS) in treatment of psychiatric and headache disorders.

BACKGROUND: Neurostimulation as a treatment option for refractory neuropsychiatric disorders has been increasingly utilized in recent years. For patients with such refractory disorders who have often failed to respond to various medical interventions, deep brain stimulation (DBS) has emerged as a promising treatment modality. DBS is a reversible and adjustable form of brain stimulation (also known as functional neurosurgery) in which desired brain structures (or circuits) are given focal electric stimulation via electrodes that are implanted in the brain tissue during a surgical procedure. It has been utilized among various psychiatric and neurological illnesses, in particular headache disorders. This article reviews the most relevant data regarding DBS for psychiatric and primary headache disorders. METHODS: Authors conducted a detailed literature search of Medline/PubMed database and studies that used DBS for the treatment of refractory neuropsychiatric disorders were reviewed. Response, remission, and safety measures of these studies were obtained. RESULTS: Despite the advancement in DBS treatment, the number of randomized controlled studies remains very limited due to ethical and methodological difficulties of setting up invasive procedures of this magnitude. So at present, DBS represents a modality used only in the most refractory patients. CONCLUSION: Current data support DBS as a promising treatment option for neuropsychiatric disorders that do not respond to conventional treatments; however, it is clear that more research and patient volume is needed to demonstrate its efficacy in treating these conditions. The use of functional imaging to understand the pathophysiology of these disorders has been crucial for the utilization of DBS.

Barriers to investigator-initiated deep brain stimulation and device research.

The success of device-based research in the clinical neurosciences has overshadowed a critical and emerging problem in the biomedical research environment in the United States. Neuroprosthetic devices, such as deep brain stimulation (DBS), have been shown in humans to be promising technologies for scientific exploration of neural pathways and as powerful treatments. Large device companies have, over the past several decades, funded and developed major research programs. However, both the structure of clinical trial funding and the current regulation of device research threaten investigator-initiated efforts in neurologic disorders. The current atmosphere dissuades clinical investigators from pursuing formal and prospective research with novel devices or novel indications. We review our experience in conducting a federally funded, investigator-initiated, device-based clinical trial that utilized DBS for thalamic pain syndrome. We also explore barriers that clinical investigators face in conducting device-based clinical trials, particularly in early-stage studies or small disease populations. We discuss 5 specific areas for potential reform and integration: (1) alternative pathways for device approval; (2) eliminating right of reference requirements; (3) combining federal grant awards with regulatory approval; (4) consolidation of oversight for human subjects research; and (5) private insurance coverage for clinical trials. Careful reformulation of regulatory policy and funding mechanisms is critical for expanding investigator-initiated device research, which has great potential to benefit science, industry, and, most importantly, patients.

Neuropsychological outcome after deep brain stimulation in the ventral capsule/ventral striatum for highly refractory obsessive-compulsive disorder or major depression.

BACKGROUND: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) has shown promise as a treatment for severe, highly treatment-refractory obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) or major depressive disorder (MDD). We describe the neuropsychological outcome in 21 patients (10 OCD and 11 MDD) who received DBS in the anterior limb of the internal capsule/ventral striatum (VC/VS). METHODS: All patients completed a preoperative and postoperative neuropsychological battery. Average duration of DBS stimulation was 8.91 months (SD = 4.63) at the time of follow-up testing. Data were analyzed using practice-effect-corrected change scores. RESULTS: No significant cognitive declines were seen. There were significant improvements in prose passage recall after chronic DBS. The cognitive improvements were not related to change in severity of OCD, depression or global impairment. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary study suggests that VC/VS DBS does not result in cognitive declines. The observations that verbal memory improved are consistent with current theories on the role of the VS in the memory, but require replication in larger studies.

A practical approach to prescribing antidepressants.

Although antidepressant drugs do not differ much in their efficacy rates, the particular characteristics of one drug may make it a better choice in a given patient. This article provides insight into the art of prescribing antidepressants in primary care, with recommendations for prescribing for patients with chronic pain, sexual dysfunction, anxiety, chronic fatigue syndrome, fibromyalgia, severe insomnia, old age, diabetes, and heart problems.

Deep brain stimulation of the ventral striatum/anterior limb of the internal capsule in thalamic pain syndrome: study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Chronic neuropathic pain in thalamic pain syndrome remains intractable. Its poor response is ascribed to destruction of the integrated neuromatrix in experience of pain. Deep brain stimulation is a promising technique to modulate activity of implicated structures. However, traditional approaches targeting sensori-motor substrates have failed to affect disability. The offending lesion in thalamic pain syndrome that almost invariably destroys sensory pain pathways may render these classical approaches ineffective. Instead, we hypothesize that targeting structures representing emotion and affective behavior-ventral striatum/anterior limb of the internal capsule, may alleviate disability. METHODS/DESIGN: We present the design of our phase I randomized, double-blinded, sham-controlled, crossover trial that examines safety, feasibility and efficacy of our proposed approach. In our ongoing trial, we intend to enroll ten patients with thalamic pain syndrome. Following implantation, patients are randomized to receive active deep brain stimulation to the ventral striatum/anterior limb of the internal capsule or sham for 3 months, after which they are crossed over. The primary endpoint is Pain Disability Index. Other outcomes include visual analog scale, depression and anxiety inventories, quality of life, and functional neuroimaging. DISCUSSION: Designing trials of deep brain stimulation for pain is challenging owing to the ethical-scientific dilemma of introducing a control arm, complicated blinding, heterogeneous etiologies, patient expectations, and inadequate assessment of disability. The quality of evidence in the field is classified as level III (poor) because it mainly includes a multitude of uncontrolled case series reporting variable outcomes, with little regard for the placebo effect related to implantation. Without valid data on efficacy, use of deep brain stimulation for pain remains "off label". We present our trial design to discuss feasibility of conducting sham-controlled phase I studies that may represent significant refinement for the field. Double-blinding would reduce influence of patient expectations and therapeutic confusion amongst investigators. With a cross-over approach, the dilemma regarding including a control group can be mitigated. Use of homogeneous etiology, measurement of disability, depression and quality of life, besides pain perception, all represent strategies to evaluate efficacy rigorously. Functional imaging would serve to define mechanisms underlying observed effects and may help optimize future targeting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01072656.