Cited by 14Electroconvulsive Therapy StudiesTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesNeurological disorders and treatments

New directions in the rational design of electrical and magnetic seizure therapies: individualized Low Amplitude Seizure Therapy (iLAST) and Magnetic Seizure Therapy (MST)

Radman, Thomas, Lisanby, Sarah H.·2017·International Review of Psychiatry

Abstract

Electroconvulsive therapy remains a key treatment option for severe cases of depression, but undesirable side-effects continue to limit its use. Innovations in the design of novel seizure therapies seek to improve its risk benefit ratio through enhanced control of the focality of stimulation. The design of seizure therapies with increased spatial precision is motivated by avoiding stimulation of deep brain structures implicated in memory retention, including the hippocampus. The development of two innovations in seizure therapy-individualized low-amplitude seizure therapy (iLAST) and magnetic seizure therapy (MST), are detailed. iLAST is a method of seizure titration involving reducing current spread in the brain by titrating current amplitude from the traditional fixed amplitudes. MST, which can be used in conjunction with iLAST dosing methods, involves the use of magnetic stimulation to reduce shunting and spreading of current by the scalp occurring during electrical stimulation. Evidence is presented on the rationale for increasing the focality of ECT in hopes of preserving its effectiveness, while reducing cognitive side-effects. Finally, the value of electric field and neural modelling is illustrated to explain observed clinical effects of modifications to ECT technique, and their utility in the rational design of the next generation of seizure therapies.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09540261.2017.1304898

Cites

9 of 9 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?

  • Low amplitude (200-400 mA) has been explored as part of individualized low-amplitude seizure therapy, but its clinical utility is yet to be understood.

    “Recently, low amplitude (200–400 mA) has been explored as part of individualized low-amplitude seizure therapy.[20] Its clinical utility is yet to be understood.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Radman, T., & Lisanby, S. H.
Affiliations
National Institute of Mental Health (US)
Corresponding author
Lisanby, Sarah H.
Venue
International Review of Psychiatry
Published
2017-03-04
Volume
29
Issue
2
Pages
63-78
ISSN
  • 0954-0261 (ISSN-L)
  • 1369-1627
OpenAlex
W2605859842
Cited by
14
References
9
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 2
FWCI
0.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Review of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Electroconvulsive Therapy Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Neurological disorders and treatments
Keywords
magnetic seizure therapy, electroconvulsive therapy, stimulation focality, hippocampal sparing, cognitive side effects, electric field simulation, neural modeling, depression treatment, current spread
MeSH terms
Mental Disorders, Convulsive Therapy, Humans, Magnetic Field Therapy

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