© Springer India 2015
Savita Malhotra and Subho Chakrabarti (eds.)Developments in Psychiatry in India10.1007/978-81-322-1674-2_2828. Newer Somatic Treatments: Indian Experience
(1)
Department of Psychiatry, Kasturba Medical College, Manipal, Karnataka, India
Keywords
Transcranial magnetic stimulationTranscranial direct current stimulationVagus nerve stimulationDeep brain stimulationIndiaS.K. Praharaj, Assistant Professor; R.V. Behere, Assistant Professor; P.S.V.N. Sharma, Professor and Head
1 Introduction
Psychopharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions have inherent limitations in the treatment of neuropsychiatric disorders. The somatic treatment approaches such as modified electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) are associated with risks of anaesthesia and cognitive adverse effects. Therefore, there is a recent surge of interest in newer somatic treatment approaches in psychiatric disorders, which are device-based, circuit-based and which have more focal actions in the key target regions of the brain. Several such approaches are being studied including transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) or recurrent transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) and deep brain stimulation (DBS). In this chapter, Indian studies using these treatment modalities for various neuropsychiatric disorders have been reviewed.
2 Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS)
TMS is a non-invasive tool, which is used for studying cortical functions, and it has therapeutic applications in various neuropsychiatric disorders. It works on the principle of electromagnetic induction, involving a bank of capacitors, which discharges very large current (peak current ~5,000 A), which rapidly flows through a simple circuit and then through a copper wire coil. This subsequently results in the induction of a brief and pulsed magnetic field (rise time ~0.1 ms, field strength ~2 T), which is perpendicular to the electric current. When the copper coil is held to the head of the subject, this induced magnetic field generates an electrical current, which is parallel to the plane of the coil and of adequate intensity to cause localised depolarisation of superficial, cortical and subcortical neurons, generating a propagating action potential, which is then used to study the various neuronal functions (George et al. 2002). The application of TMS can produce immediate (within seconds) effects, such as quick jerky movements and perception of flashes of light. Different frequencies of TMS have been found to result in divergent intermediate-term (seconds to several minutes) biologic effects. Studies have revealed that repeated stimulation of a single neuron at low frequency produces long lasting inhibition of cell-to-cell communications, which is called as long–term depression (LTD; Bear 1999); conversely, repeated high-frequency stimulation can improve cell-to-cell communication by long–term potentiation (LTP; Malenka and Nicoll 1999). In low-frequency rTMS (or slow rTMS), stimulation of less than 1 Hz is applied for a longer duration (10–15 min), resulting in LTD of cortical neurons, whereas high-frequency rTMS (or fast rTMS) involves greater 1 Hz frequency stimulation for a shorter duration, manifested as neuronal LTP (Wassermann et al. 1996). Long-term (days to weeks) effects have also been observed with TMS administration, reflected as sustained changes in neurotransmitter release, signalling pathways and gene expression (Post and Keck 2001).
2.1 rTMS in Depression
The therapeutic effects of rTMS have been robust in the field of depression as shown by meta-analysis of the studies, though only small to medium effect sizes have been reported (Berlim et al. 2013a, b). Two major strategies have been used, which have similar antidepressant effect: high-frequency rTMS to the left prefrontal cortex (PFC) and low-frequency to the right PFC, the latter is better tolerated with lower risk of seizure (Rachid and Bertschy 2006).
Ray et al. (2011) conducted a randomised controlled study on the efficacy of adjunctive high-frequency rTMS of the left PFC in 45 patients with moderate-to-severe depression. These patients received 10 daily sessions of active or sham rTMS (10 Hz, 90 % of resting motor threshold—MT, 20 trains, 6 s duration, 1,200 pulses/day). Depression and psychosis were rated using the Structured Interview Guide for the hamilton depression rating scale (SIGH-D) and brief psychiatric rating scale (BPRS), respectively, before and after rTMS. There was significant effect of treatment over time for both SIGH-D and BPRS scores, with high effect sizes. Similar results were observed with the psychotic subgroup. Another randomised, double-blind, controlled trial by Lingeswaran (2011) on a smaller sample (n = 23) using six sessions of rTMS (10 Hz, 100 % of MT, 10 trains, 5 s duration, 1 min inter-train interval) over the left PFC failed to find a difference between active and sham stimulations. The small sample size and fewer rTMS sessions could have resulted in lack of efficacy of active rTMS in their study (Praharaj 2011).
In an open-label study (Jhanwar et al. 2011a, b), 21 patients with treatment-resistant major depressive disorder (defined as failing to respond to an adequate trial of at least 2 antidepressants) received add-on high-frequency rTMS (10 Hz, 110 % of MT) over the left PFC for 4 weeks. An intention-to-treat analysis showed significant reduction in mean HAM-D17 scores from 30.80 (SD 5.00) to 19 (SD 6.37). In a case study, Chatterjee et al. (2012) used high-frequency rTMS over the left PFC in a patient with treatment-resistant depression who went into complete remission following treatment. Although the authors described it as maintenance rTMS, they had used a prolonged course of rTMS (20 sessions) only during the depressive episodes. The number of pulses delivered was high (2,000–3,000 pulses per session), which could have led to the greater than expected improvement. In another single case study, Bagati et al. (2012) used high-frequency rTMS over the left PFC of a patient with treatment-resistant depression, who subsequently developed a seizure during the fourth rTMS session. He received further rTMS sessions under the cover of antiepileptic drug valproate and improved without any recurrence of seizures.
In a novel design, Nongpiur et al. (2011) compared the efficacy of adjuvant, frequency-modulated, active-priming rTMS with sham-priming stimulation in the theta range in patients with moderate-to-severe depression receiving low-frequency rTMS. 40 patients with moderate-to-severe depression were alternately assigned to receive add-on, active-priming rTMS (4–8 Hz; 400 pulses, at 90 % of MT) or sham-priming stimulation followed by low-frequency rTMS (1 Hz; 900 pulses at 110 % of MT) over the right PFC. They were rated with the SIGH-D, the BPRS, and the Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) scale at baseline, after the 5th and 10th rTMS, and 2 weeks post-rTMS treatment. For the SIGH-D scores, there was a significant improvement in the active group over time. Stepwise linear-regression analysis showed that age at onset significantly predicted the SIGH-D scores after the 5th rTMS session in the active-priming group. Pre-stimulation with frequency-modulated priming stimulation in the theta range had greater antidepressant effect than low-frequency stimulation alone.
Venkatesh Babu et al. (2012) studied the efficacy of add-on high-frequency rTMS over the right parietal cortex in patients with moderate-to-severe, unipolar depression. 30 patients were randomly assigned to receive active or sham rTMS (10 Hz; 1,200 pulses at 90 % MT). They were rated with the Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Depression Scale (SIGH-D), the Beck’s depression Inventory (BDI), the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM–A) and the CGI-S at baseline, after the 5th and the 10th rTMS and 2 weeks post-rTMS treatment. There was a significant effect of treatment over time as shown by changes in the SIGH-D, the BDI and the CGI-S scores in the active group, compared to sham group.
Udupa et al. (2007) examined the effect of rTMS versus treatment with escitalopram on cardiac autonomic parameters, including heart rate variability in 67 patients with major depressive disorder. Heart rate variability measures suggested a significant improvement in sympathovagal balance in the group receiving rTMS, as compared to the escitalopram group. In an extension of this study, which included three patients groups (n = 94) receiving either rTMS or tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), Udupa et al. (2011) found that measures of cardiac autonomic function improved in rTMS group, worsened in TCA group, and there was no change in the SSRI group. These preliminary studies suggest a cardioprotective role for rTMS in patients with depression. This finding is important in the context of evidence suggesting enhanced risk of cardiovascular events in patients with depression.
In a single case study, Mehta et al. (2013) found enhanced mirror neuron activity (change in motor evoked potential from resting to observation phase) during catatonia in a patient with bipolar depression, which disappeared after resolution of catatonia.
2.2 rTMS in Schizophrenia
In schizophrenia, hypoactivity of prefrontal cortex plays a role in the pathophysiology of negative symptoms, for which high-frequency rTMS of the prefrontal cortex has been used, whereas for positive symptoms such as hallucinations, which are associated with hyperactivity of temporoparietal areas, low-frequency rTMS has been studied (Mishra et al. 2011).
Goyal et al. (2007) studied the efficacy of adjuvant 10 Hz suprathreshold left prefrontal rTMS in negative symptoms of schizophrenia in a double-blind, controlled design in 10 patients with psychopathology, depression and global improvement ratings before and after the rTMS sessions. Compared to sham treatment control group, active rTMS significantly improved negative symptoms, irrespective of change in depressive symptoms.
Bagati et al. (2009) studied the efficacy of low-frequency left temporoparietal rTMS for auditory hallucinations in schizophrenia. Forty patients were randomised to experimental or control groups. The experimental group received add-on low-frequency rTMS (1 Hz, 90 % MT) over left temporoparietal cortex for 10 days, and the control group received only antipsychotics. The changes in the psychopathology scores for the auditory hallucinations were recorded using the auditory hallucination recording scale. A significant improvement was found in auditory hallucinations in the experimental group as compared to the control group.
Garg et al. (2013a, b) studied high-frequency cerebellar vermal rTMS in a patient with treatment-resistant schizophrenia. This patient received 10 sessions of rTMS in the theta frequency range (5 Hz for the first 7 trains, 6 Hz for the next 7 trains and 7 Hz for the rest 6 trains), at 100 % MT, 20 trains of 30 pulses each to a total of 600 pulses. There was a worsening of auditory verbal hallucinations, whereas an improvement was seen in anergia and thought disorder.
Thirthalli et al. (2008) in a single case study have described use of maintenance rTMS in a patient with treatment-refractory auditory hallucinations. rTMS (1 Hz, 100 % motor threshold) was administered over the left temporoparietal cortex initially once daily, 5 times a week for 2 weeks. Maintenance rTMS was then continued at a frequency of once weekly for 6 weeks, once fortnightly for 6 fortnights and once monthly for 3 months. The patient achieved near total remission in auditory hallucinations, with significant improvement in functioning levels at week 4, which was maintained at the end of 8 months.
In an observational study, Mehta et al. (2012) examined mirror neuron activity using single-pulse TMS in schizophrenia patients (n = 27). There was significant correlation between mirror neuron activity (as measured by the per cent change in motor evoked potential from resting to observation stage) and emotion recognition index (a measure of social cognition).
2.3 rTMS in Mania
There are only a few studies on the therapeutic efficacy of rTMS in the manic phase of bipolar disorder. High-frequency rTMS of the right PFC has been found to be effective in mania, suggesting that the therapeutic effect may show a laterality effect opposite to that in depression.
Praharaj et al. (2009) studied the efficacy of adjunctive right prefrontal high-frequency suprathreshold rTMS treatment in patients with bipolar affective disorder, mania, compared to sham stimulation. Forty one right-handed patients with mania were randomised to receive daily sessions of active or sham rTMS (20 Hz, 110 % of MT, 20 trains, 10 s inter-train interval) over the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex for 10 days. Mania was rated using the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) and the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) at baseline and after the 5th and the 10th rTMS. There was a significant effect of treatment over time for both the YMRS and the CGI-S scores suggestive of add-on therapeutic efficacy.
Pathak and Sinha (2008) examined the efficacy of adjunctive right prefrontal high-frequency (rapid) and left prefrontal low-frequency rTMS treatment in children and adolescents with manic episodes. 28 patients were administered rapid rTMS (20 Hz right prefrontal rTMS, 20 trains per session, each train for 2 s and inter-train interval of 10 s) and 25 low-frequency rTMS (1 Hz left prefrontal rTMS, 20 trains per session, each train for 40 s) for 2 weeks each. In both groups, patients were randomly assigned to active and sham group. They were rated using the YMRS and the CGI at baseline, after the 5th and the 10th rTMS. There was no significant improvement in psychopathology rating scores (YMRS and CGI-S) in the patients receiving active rapid rTMS or low-frequency rTMS as compared to sham controls. The results of this study do not support an active therapeutic effect of add-on rapid right prefrontal or low-frequency left prefrontal rTMS in children and adolescents with mania.
2.4 rTMS in Substance Abuse
Studies have also revealed the potential anticraving effects of rTMS in substance dependence. Muralidharan et al. (2008) explored the differences in the functioning of cortical inhibitory systems in high-risk (n = 15) and low-risk (n = 15) patients with alcohol dependence using single-pulse TMS. High-risk subjects had significantly shorter contralateral and ipsilateral (iSP) silent periods and a relatively higher prevalence of ‘absent’ iSP. They had significantly higher mean externalising symptom scores than low-risk subjects, and there was a significant negative correlation between iSP duration and externalising symptom scores. These findings suggest that high-risk subjects have relative impairments in cortico-cortical and transcallosal inhibitory mechanisms resulting in central nervous system hyperexcitability, which may be aetiologically linked to the excess of externalising behaviours. In another study (Muralidharan et al. 2013), resting motor threshold (the minimum stimulus intensity required to elicit a motor evoked potential of greater than or equal to 50 μV in at least 50 % of trials) and motor threshold 1 (defined as the lowest stimulus intensity required to elicit a motor evoked potential greater than 1 mV in at least 50 % of trials) was not significantly different in high-risk (n = 16) and low-risk (n = 12) patients with alcohol dependence, using single-pulse TMS.

Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel

Full access? Get Clinical Tree

