Cited by 84Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesTreatment of Major DepressionElectroconvulsive Therapy Studies

Antidepressant efficacy and cognitive effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in vascular depression: an open trial

Fabre, I., Galinowski, A., Oppenheim, C., Gallarda, T., Meder, J. F., de Montigny, C., Olié, J. P., Poirier, M. F.·2004·International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry

Abstract

Background Beneficial effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) were demonstrated by many controlled studies in major depression. Moreover, this promising and non invasive therapeutic tool seems to be better tolerated than electroconvulsive therapy.Vascular depression is a subtype of late-life depression, associated with cerebrovascular disease and means a poorer response to antidepressant treatment. We employed rTMS over the left prefrontal cortex in 11 patients with late-onset resistant vascular depression. The primary purpose of this two-week open study was to examine antidepressant efficacy of rTMS in vascular depression. The secondary aim was to evaluate cognitive effects of rTMS in our sample. Methods Clinical status, as measured with the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS), and cognitive effects, as evaluated by neuropsychological tests, were assessed at baseline and after two weeks of rTMS. Brain measurements to obtain an index of prefrontal atrophy were performed at both the motor cortex and prefrontal cortex. Results Five out of 11 resistant patients with late-onset vascular depression were responders. They showed a clinically meaningful improvement in HDRS scores, with a decrease of 11, 4 points (p Conclusions Our preliminary observations prompt to perform a subsequent controlled study to examine if rTMS may constitute an alternative to electroconvulsive therapy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/gps.1172

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fabre, I., Galinowski, A., Oppenheim, C., Gallarda, T., Meder, J. F., de Montigny, C., Olié, J. P., & Poirier, M. F.
Affiliations
Centre Hospitalier Sainte-Anne (FR)
Corresponding author
Poirier, M. F.
Venue
International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2004-07-28
Volume
19
Issue
9
Pages
833-842
ISSN
  • 0885-6230 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1166
OpenAlex
W2070660858
Cited by
84
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 7
FWCI
2.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Electroconvulsive Therapy Studies
Keywords
repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, vascular depression, geriatric depression, antidepressant efficacy, cognitive effects, prefrontal cortex, treatment-resistant depression, verbal fluency, visuospatial memory, verbal memory, non-invasive brain stimulation
MeSH terms
Aged, Atrophy, Cerebrovascular Disorders, Cognition, Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, Prospective Studies, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Treatment Outcome, Prefrontal Cortex, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review