Cited by 152Vagus Nerve Stimulation ResearchNeurological disorders and treatmentsTreatment of Major Depression

A patient-level meta-analysis of studies evaluating vagus nerve stimulation therapy for treatment-resistant depression

Open access
Olin, Bryan, Berry, Broglio, Bunker, Jayewardene, Rush·2013·Medical Devices: Evidence and Research

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare response and remission rates in depressed patients with chronic treatment-resistant depression (TRD) treated with vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) Therapy(®) plus treatment as usual (VNS + TAU) or TAU alone in a meta-analysis using Bayesian hierarchical models. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: Six outpatient, multicenter, clinical trials that have evaluated VNS + TAU or TAU in TRD, including two single-arm studies of VNS + TAU (n = 60 and n = 74), a randomized study of VNS + TAU versus TAU (n = 235), a randomized study of VNS + TAU comparing different VNS stimulation intensities (n = 331), a nonrandomized registry of VNS + TAU versus TAU (n = 636), and a single-arm study of TAU (n = 124) to provide longer-term, control data for comparison with VNS-treated patients. DATA EXTRACTION: A systematic review of individual patient-level data based on the intent-to-treat principle, including all patients who contributed more than one post-baseline visit. Response was based on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Clinical Global Impressions scale's Improvement subscale (CGI-I), as these were the two clinician-rated measures common across all or most studies. Remission was based on the MADRS. RESULTS: Outcomes were compared from baseline up to 96 weeks of treatment with VNS + TAU (n = 1035) versus TAU (n = 425). The MADRS response rate for VNS + TAU at 12, 24, 48, and 96 weeks were 12%, 18%, 28%, and 32% versus 4%, 7%, 12%, and 14% for TAU. The MADRS remission rate for VNS + TAU at 12, 24, 48, and 96 weeks were 3%, 5%, 10%, and 14% versus 1%, 1%, 2%, and 4%, for TAU. Adjunctive VNS Therapy was associated with a greater likelihood of response (odds ratio [OR] = 3.19, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.12, 4.66) and remission (OR = 4.99, CI: 2.93, 7.76), compared with TAU. For patients who had responded to VNS + TAU at 24 weeks, sustained response was more likely at 48 weeks (OR = 1.98, CI: 1.34, 3.01) and at 96 weeks (OR = 3.42, CI: 1.78, 7.31). Similar results were observed for CGI-I response. CONCLUSION: For patients with chronic TRD, VNS + TAU has greater response and remission rates that are more likely to persist than TAU.

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 · 10.2147/mder.s41017

Cites

45 of 45 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?

  • A meta-analysis that compared the application of VNS to the usual treatment in depressed patients showed a response rate of approximately 50% in the acute phase of the disease and a long-term remission rate of 20% after 2 years of treatment.

    “A meta analysis that compared the application of VNS to the usual treatment in depressed patients showed a response rate of approximately 50% in the acute phase of the disease and a long-term remission rate of 20% after 2 years of treatment (114).”

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
Olin, B., Berry, Broglio, Bunker, Jayewardene, & Rush
Affiliations
Berry Consultants, LLC (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
Olin, Bryan
Venue
Medical Devices: Evidence and Research
Published
2013-03
Volume
6
Pages
17
ISSN
1179-1470 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1953956911
Cited by
152
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 1
FWCI
1.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Medical Devices Evidence and Research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Vagus Nerve Stimulation Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Neurological disorders and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
Keywords
vagus nerve stimulation, treatment-resistant depression, adjunctive therapy, depression remission, usual care, stimulation intensity, Bayesian hierarchical model, individual patient data, long-term outcomes, Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, CGI-I

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