RESUMO
While most patients with depression respond to pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy, about one-third will present treatment resistance to these interventions. For patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD), invasive neurostimulation therapies such as vagus nerve stimulation, deep brain stimulation, and epidural cortical stimulation may be considered. We performed a narrative review of the published literature to identify papers discussing clinical studies with invasive neurostimulation therapies for TRD. After a database search and title and abstract screening, relevant English-language articles were analyzed. Vagus nerve stimulation, approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration as a TRD treatment, may take several months to show therapeutic benefits, and the average response rate varies from 15.2-83%. Deep brain stimulation studies have shown encouraging results, including rapid response rates (> 30%), despite conflicting findings from randomized controlled trials. Several brain regions, such as the subcallosal-cingulate gyrus, nucleus accumbens, ventral capsule/ventral striatum, anterior limb of the internal capsule, medial-forebrain bundle, lateral habenula, inferior-thalamic peduncle, and the bed-nucleus of the stria terminalis have been identified as key targets for TRD management. Epidural cortical stimulation, an invasive intervention with few reported cases, showed positive results (40-60% response), although more extensive trials are needed to confirm its potential in patients with TRD.
RESUMO
While most patients with depression respond to pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy, about one-third will present treatment resistance to these interventions. For patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD), invasive neurostimulation therapies such as vagus nerve stimulation, deep brain stimulation, and epidural cortical stimulation may be considered. We performed a narrative review of the published literature to identify papers discussing clinical studies with invasive neurostimulation therapies for TRD. After a database search and title and abstract screening, relevant English-language articles were analyzed. Vagus nerve stimulation, approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration as a TRD treatment, may take several months to show therapeutic benefits, and the average response rate varies from 15.2-83%. Deep brain stimulation studies have shown encouraging results, including rapid response rates (> 30%), despite conflicting findings from randomized controlled trials. Several brain regions, such as the subcallosal-cingulate gyrus, nucleus accumbens, ventral capsule/ventral striatum, anterior limb of the internal capsule, medial-forebrain bundle, lateral habenula, inferior-thalamic peduncle, and the bed-nucleus of the stria terminalis have been identified as key targets for TRD management. Epidural cortical stimulation, an invasive intervention with few reported cases, showed positive results (40-60% response), although more extensive trials are needed to confirm its potential in patients with TRD.
Assuntos
Estimulação Encefálica Profunda , Transtorno Depressivo Resistente a Tratamento , Encéfalo , Estimulação Encefálica Profunda/métodos , Depressão , Transtorno Depressivo Resistente a Tratamento/terapia , Humanos , PsicoterapiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Stuttering is often accompanied by involuntary movements, abnormal gestures or changes in facial expression. OBJECTIVE: To describe the incidence and phenomenology of abnormal movements (AMs) in stuttering patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-five consecutive patients with stuttering and 119 normal controls videotaped and subsequently reviewed, in which AMs were classified as voluntary or involuntary, and as concurrent or unrelated to speech. Movement phenomenology was correlated with disease severity. RESULTS: Of 85 stuttering patients studied, 51.7% had AMs and 22 more than one AM. Sixty-six different AMs were identified, of which 83.3% occurred during speech, 72.7% were classified as involuntary, and 27.2% as voluntary. Of 38 involuntary movements concurrent to speech, 25 were originally perceived as voluntary, but had since become involuntary through repeated use during stuttering. All involuntary movements not concurrent to speech fulfilled criteria for tics. CONCLUSION: AMs occurring during stuttering were not always involuntary; movements not concurrent with speech clearly fulfilled clinical criteria for tics and were similar in incidence to normal controls. Inverse correlation was found between conscious control of movement during speech and stuttering severity. Many involuntary movements occurring during speech were clearly referred by patients as initially voluntary early on in the development of their speech disorder (starters or unblockers), underlining the importance of repetitive use of complex motor sequences as a source for putative involuntary movement genesis.