Cited by 100Neurological disorders and treatmentsTreatment of Major DepressionTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies

A randomized double-blind crossover trial of deep brain stimulation of the subcallosal cingulate gyrus in patients with treatment-resistant depression: a pilot study of relapse prevention

Open access
Puigdemont, Dolors, Portella, Maria J., Pérez-Egea, Rosario, Molet, Joan, Gironell, Alexandre, de Diego-Adeliño, Javier, Martín, Anna, Rodríguez, Rodrigo +3 more·2015·Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To date, antidepressant drugs show limited efficacy, leaving a large number of patients experiencing severe and persistent symptoms of major depression. Previous open-label clinical trials have reported significant sustained improvements with deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the subcallosal cingulate gyrus (SCG) in patients with severe, chronic treatment-resistant depression (TRD). This study aimed to confirm the efficacy and measure the impact of discontinuation of the electrical stimulation. METHODS: We conducted a 6-month double-blind, randomized, sham-controlled crossover study in implanted patients with previous severe TRD who experienced full remission after chronic stimulation. After more than 3 months of stable remission, patients were randomly assigned to 2 treatment arms: the ON-OFF arm, which involved active electrode stimulation for 3 months followed by sham stimulation for 3 months, and the OFF-ON arm, which involved sham stimulation for 3 months followed by active stimulation for 3 months. The primary outcome measure was the difference in the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD-17) total score between sham and active stimulation. RESULTS: We enrolled 5 patients in our trial. A Friedman repeated-measures analysis of variance revealed a significant effect of treatment (χ(2)1 = 5.0, p = 0.025) in patients with higher depression scores during sham stimulation. At the end of active stimulation, depression was remitted in 4 of 5 patients and none of them had experienced a relapse, whereas at the end of sham stimulation, 2 patients remained in remission, 2 relapsed and 1 showed a progressive worsening without reaching relapse criteria. LIMITATIONS: The small sample size limited the statistical power and external validity. CONCLUSION: These preliminary findings indicate that DBS of the SCG is an effective and safe treatment for severe forms of TRD and that continuous electrical stimulation is required to maintain therapeutic effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01268137 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1503/jpn.130295

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • After SCC DBS discontinuation, depressive symptoms remained in remission at 3 months in 2 of 5 patients.

    “depressive symptoms remained in remission 3 months after SCC DBS discontinuation in 2/5 patients [27]”

    From Deep brain stimulation for depression. (2022) · cites this paper as [27]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Puigdemont, D., Portella, M. J., Pérez-Egea, R., Molet, J., Gironell, A., de Diego-Adeliño, J., Martín, A., Rodríguez, R., Àlvarez, E., Artigas, F., & Pérez, V.
Affiliations
  • Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (ES)
  • From the Department of Psychiatry, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Salud Mental, Institut d’Investigació Biomèdica Sant Pau
Venue
Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience
Published
2015-07
Volume
40
Issue
4
Pages
224-231
ISSN
  • 1180-4882 (ISSN-L)
  • 1488-2434
OpenAlex
W1869776851
Cited by
100
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 3
FWCI
8.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DIGITAL.CSIC (Spanish National Research Council (CSIC)) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación
  • Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Salud Mental
  • Instituto de Salud Carlos III
  • European Regional Development Fund
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Neurological disorders and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Keywords
deep brain stimulation, treatment-resistant depression, relapse prevention, chronic stimulation, sham stimulation, depression remission, major depressive disorder
MeSH terms
Adult, Depressive Disorder, Major, Major Depressive Disorder, Double-Blind Method, Female, Gyrus Cinguli, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pilot Projects, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Treatment Outcome, Cross-Over Studies, Deep Brain Stimulation, Secondary Prevention, Depressive Disorder, Treatment-Resistant

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