Advances in Clinical Medicine
Vol. 13  No. 12 ( 2023 ), Article ID: 78260 , 7 pages
10.12677/ACM.2023.13122843

间歇性Theta脉冲刺激对卒中后抑郁患者的 临床疗效研究

董捷,韩婕,毕耘枫,李江*,徐子涵,郑雅文,刘冬

青岛大学附属医院康复医学科,山东 青岛

收稿日期:2023年11月27日;录用日期:2023年12月21日;发布日期:2023年12月28日

摘要

目的:探讨间歇性Theta脉冲刺激对卒中后抑郁患者的临床疗效。方法:采用随机数字表法将32例符合纳入标准的PSD患者分为试验组及对照组,每组16例。试验组给予常规康复训练、抗抑郁药物盐酸舍曲林50 mg每日一次、左侧背外侧前额叶皮层iTBS模式经颅磁刺激;对照组给予常规康复训练、抗抑郁药物盐酸舍曲林50 mg每日一次、左侧背外侧前额叶皮层假iTBS模式经颅磁刺激。每位患者于治疗前、治疗3周后进行汉密尔顿抑郁评定量表24项(HAMD-24)、蒙哥马利抑郁评定量表(MADRS)及事件相关诱发电位P300潜伏期测定指标,评定两组患者的卒中后抑郁程度以及治疗后改善情况。结果:治疗前两组患者的HAMD-24、MADRS评分及P300潜伏期比较均无显著性差异(P > 0.05);经过3周治疗后,两组患者HAMD-24、MADRS评分与组内治疗前相比均有明显下降、P300潜伏期较治疗前缩短(P < 0.05);且试验组较对照组有更明显的下降,两组间有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。结论:iTBS在改善PSD患者抑郁情绪方面有良好效果,且较单纯药物治疗效果更佳。

关键词

重复经颅磁刺激,卒中后抑郁,Theta脉冲刺激,汉密尔顿抑郁评定量表,事件相关诱发电位P300

Clinical Efficacy of Intermittent Theta Pulse Stimulation in Patients with Post-Stroke Depression

Jie Dong, Jie Han, Yunfeng Bi, Jiang Li*, Zihan Xu, Yawen Zheng, Dong Liu

Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao Shandong

Received: Nov. 27th, 2023; accepted: Dec. 21st, 2023; published: Dec. 28th, 2023

ABSTRACT

Objective: To investigate the clinical effect of intermittent Theta pulse stimulation on patients with post-stroke depression. Methods: 32 patients with PSD who met the inclusion criteria were divided into experimental group and control group by random number table method, with 16 cases in each group. The experimental group was given routine rehabilitation training, the antidepressant Sertraline hydrochloride 50 mg once a day, the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex iTBS mode transcranial magnetic stimulation; The control group was given routine rehabilitation training, the antidepressant Sertraline 50 mg once a day, and left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex pseudo-iTBS mode transcranial magnetic stimulation. Hamilton Depression Rating Scale 24 (HAMD-24), Montgomery Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and event related evoked potential P300 latency were performed before and 3 weeks after treatment for each patient, and the degree of post-stroke depression and the improvement after treatment were assessed. Results: There were no significant differences in HAMD-24, MADRS scores and P300 latency between the two groups before treatment (P > 0.05). After 3 weeks of treatment, HAMD-24 and MADRS scores were significantly decreased in both groups compared with before treatment, and P300 latency was shorter than before treatment (P < 0.05). The experimental group had a more significant decrease than the control group, and there was statistical significance between the two groups (P < 0.05). Conclusion: iTBS had a good effect on improving the depressive mood of PSD patients, and the effect was better than that of drug therapy alone.

Keywords:Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, Post-Stroke Depression, Theta Impulse Stimulation, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, Event Related Evoked Potential P300

Copyright © 2023 by author(s) and Hans Publishers Inc.

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY 4.0).

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

1. 引言

卒中后抑郁(Post-stroke Depression, PSD)是发生于脑卒中后,表现出卒中症状以外的一系列以情绪低落、兴趣丧失为主要特征的情感障碍综合征,常伴有躯体症状。PSD是脑卒中后常见的心理健康问题,困扰着约33%的脑卒中幸存者,多发生于脑卒中1年内,尤其是脑卒中3个月内 [1] 。PSD对脑卒中后的康复、运动和认知障碍的恢复都有负面影响,并显著增加了神经血管事件复发的可能 [2] [3] [4] 。

经颅磁刺激(Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, TMS)是一种重要的无创脑刺激技术 [1] ,它可以利用规律变化的磁场产生感应电流进行治疗,具有安全、无创、无疼痛等特点,近年来逐渐被较普遍地用以临床治疗。

Theta节律刺激(Theta Burst Stimulation, TBS)是TMS的一种刺激模式,它模拟了海马在工作、学习时产生的内源性震荡θ频率,能够以较弱的刺激、较短的时间产生迅速而持久的影响。

2. 对象与方法

2.1. 研究对象

选择2022年6月至2023年7月在青岛大学附属医院西海岸院区康复医学科住院治疗的卒中后抑郁患者32例,采用分配隐藏,按照随机数字表法分为试验组和对照组,每组16例。最终因患者原因试验组脱落1例,对照组脱落1例,共30例完成本研究。本研究获青岛大学附属医院临床研究伦理学委员会审核并通过(QYFY WZLL 27923)。两组患者的年龄、性别、病程时间、脑卒中类型等一般资料经统计学分析比较,组间差异均无统计学意义(P > 0.05),具有可比性,见表1

Table 1. Comparison of general data between two groups of patients

表1. 两组患者一般资料的比较

纳入标准:① 首次发生脑卒中,符合缺血性脑卒中及脑出血的诊断标准,均经过颅脑CT或MRI证实。② 抑郁症状为首发,PSD诊断符合《卒中后抑郁临床实践的中国专家共识》(2016年)的诊断标准,且汉密尔顿抑郁量表24项(HAMD-24)评分 > 20分。③ 年龄18~80岁,脑卒中病程 ≥ 2周,病情稳定,能配合完成相关评估、检查及治疗。④ 入组前1个月未服用任何抗抑郁药物。⑤ 患者自愿参加此次试验并签署知情同意书。

排除标准:① 研究对象合并有癫痫、帕金森病。② 研究对象病变部位在左侧额叶。③ 合并有失语、严重认知障碍(MMSE<10分)。④ 体内有金属支架或心脏装有起搏器。⑤ 既往有抑郁病史或精神障碍。

脱落标准:① 治疗过程中发生癫痫。② 治疗过程中出现明显不耐受。③ 患者因自身原因拒绝继续治疗。

2.2. 治疗方法

两组病例均给予常规物理治疗、作业治疗、针灸、推拿、理疗等常规康复训练和口服抗抑郁药物盐酸舍曲林50 mg每日一次,每日1次治疗,治疗时长为3周。治疗仪器选用依瑞德公司生产的磁刺激仪,CCY-I型,线圈选择为直径12.5 cm的圆形线圈。试验组刺激模式为iTBS模式,它将3个爆发式脉冲每200毫秒(即5 Hz)以50 Hz的频率发送 [5] 。iTBS组参数为2秒钟刺激后进行8秒钟间歇,而后继续这一循环,共1200次脉冲,治疗时间为6 min 40 s。刺激部位为左侧背外侧前额叶皮层(左DLPFC),刺激强度:80%RMT。而对照组在相同部位给予假iTBS刺激,包括相同的刺激参数,脉冲数及刺激时间,刺激线圈与患者头部保持垂直。静息运动阈值(resting motor threshold, RMT)测量方法为:连接运动诱发电位电极片于拇短展肌处,将圆型线圈中心点对准M1区,自低强度开始刺激,直至连续10次刺激产生的肌电有5次高于50 uv,另外5次低于50 uv,这时的刺激强度即为该患者的RMT。本研究刺激强度设置为80%RMT。

3. 评价指标及方法

分别于治疗前及治疗3周后对两组所有患者进行HAMD-24、MADRS评定、诱发电位P300潜伏期测定。

3.1. 汉密尔顿抑郁量表(Hamilton Depression Scale, HAMD)

汉密尔顿抑郁量表(Hamilton Depression Scale, HAMD)是评估抑郁症最常用的量表,由受过训练的专业医师进行观察和测试,分数越低,证明抑郁的程度越轻。该量表含有24项内容,每个项目为0~4分,总分为96分。总分 < 8分为正常,8~20分可能有抑郁症,21~35分有抑郁症,总分 > 35分为严重抑郁症。

3.2. 蒙哥马利抑郁评定量表(Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, MADRS)

蒙哥马利抑郁评定量表(Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, MADRS)该量表评分相对简单,但对患者的症状变化较敏感,可以反映抗抑郁治疗的效果,监测患者的病情变化。

3.3. P300

P300是事件相关电位的一个内源性成分,不受物理特征影响,与被试者的精神状态和注意力有关,有很好的稳定性。研究发现P300潜伏期与抑郁症严重程度呈正相关,P300振幅与抑郁症严重程度呈负相关 [6] [7] [8] 。本研究中事件相关诱发电位P300检测使用日本光电产MEB-2306C型肌电诱发电位仪,参照国际脑电图协会10/20法,记录电极置于Fz、Cz点,参考电极置于双侧耳后乳突,接地电极放置于健侧腕部,靶刺激概率为0.15,刺激频率为0.9 Hz,声音强度为90 dB,靶叠加数为30次,记录P300潜伏期变化。

4. 统计学分析

应用IBM SPSS Statistics 22.0 (IBM SPSS, Armonk, NY, USA)用于数据分析。计量资料首先检验判断是否服从正态分布,若服从正态分布则以 x ¯ ± s 表示,治疗前后的组内比较采用配对t检验;两组间比较采用独立样本t检验。若不符合正态分布,则以四分位数(P25~P75)表示,治疗前后的组内比较采用Wilcoxon秩和检验。两组间比较采用Mann-Whitney检验。当P < 0.05时,认为差异有显著性意义。

5. 结果

两组患者治疗前后抑郁状态的比较(HAMD-24评分、MADRS评分、P300潜伏期(ms)测定)。

治疗前两组患者的HAMD-24、MADRS评分及P300潜伏期测定均无显著性差异(P > 0.05),具有可比性。治疗后两组患者HAMD-24、MADRS评分较组内治疗前均有明显下降(P < 0.05);治疗后两组间HAMD-24、MADRS评分差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05),见表2。治疗后两组患者P300潜伏期较组内治疗前均有明显下降(P < 0.05);治疗后两组间P300潜伏期差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。详见表3

Table 2. Comparison of depression status before and after treatment between two groups ( x ¯ ± s )

表2. 两组患者治疗前后抑郁状态的比较( x ¯ ± s )

注:与组内治疗前相比,aP < 0.05;与对照组治疗后同一指标相比,bP < 0.05。

Table 3. Comparison of P300 latency before and after treatment between the two groups ( x ¯ ± s )

表3. 两组患者治疗前后P300潜伏期的比较( x ¯ ± s )

注:与组内治疗前相比,aP < 0.05;与对照组治疗后同一指标相比,bP < 0.05。

安全耐受性

一项荟萃分析报告称,迄今为止,TBS治疗过程中仅有过一次癫痫发作,发作的粗风险为0.02%。轻度不良事件的总体粗风险估计为1.1%,这些发现与高频rTMS方案相当 [9] [10] 。在本研究过程中,对照组中研究对象未出现不适,仅试验组1名患者在治疗过程中诉头痛,暂停治疗后头痛好转,未再头痛。其余研究对象未发生头痛、头晕、癫痫等耐受情况,表明TBS模式在治疗过程中是比较安全的。

6. 讨论

本研究探索了间歇性Theta脉冲刺激对卒中后抑郁患者的临床疗效,研究结果显示,与组内治疗前相比,试验组与对照组均对PSD患者情绪改善有作用,且差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05);试验组与对照组组间相比,对于改善抑郁情绪,试验组有更好的临床疗效(P < 0.05)。

卒中后抑郁是卒中后常见且可治疗的并发症之一,如未及时诊断及治疗,可能会影响整体的康复进程或回归社会的能力,研究表明,抗抑郁药物治疗的患者的平均功能改善比未治疗患者好30% [2] [3] [4] [11] 。但是在临床诊疗中,由于PSD的临床表现多种多样,加之很多患者往往合并有认知障碍,很多医师往往未关注到患者脑卒中后情绪的波动及变化;在临床实践中,只有5%的卒中患者被诊断为PSD并予以治疗,诊断率及治疗率远低于发生概率 [12] 。因此,脑卒中后对患者情绪变化的关注、筛查以及评估显得尤为重要。本研究中关于抑郁情绪的评估采用了最经典的汉密尔顿抑郁量表、对于情绪改变较敏感的蒙哥马利抑郁量表以及客观指标运动诱发电位P300测定。

在关于PSD的治疗方面,PSD患者接受抗抑郁药物治疗,如血清素选择性再摄取抑制剂(SSRI),然而这些药物至少需要3~4周才能引起临床反应,效率仅为50%左右,只有30%的患者达到缓解 [13] 。此外,使用三环类抗抑郁药(TCAs)、SSRIs或多种类型的药物使用者增加了卒中复发的风险 [14] 。因此,显然有必要开发更多安全有效地治疗PSD的方法 [15] 。近些年重复经颅磁刺激应用广泛,10 Hz高频rTMS已被证实对抑郁患者有良好的效果 [16] [17] ,也越来越多的学者探究Theta节律刺激的抗抑郁效果。Theta节律刺激被认为是一种诱导动物LTP和LTD的高效方法,这种刺激方法在皮层兴奋性方面产生了更为稳定和持久的变化 [18] 。将这种模式应用于人类,只需改变刺激序列,就可以在皮层兴奋性中诱导持久的兴奋性和抑制性变化。研究表明,经颅磁刺激治疗均有良好的抗抑郁效果 [19] [20] [21] 。O’Reardon JP等人的大型随机对照试验表明,10 Hz高频rTMS具有显著的抗抑郁效果 [22] 。Blumberger DM等人研究表明,iTBS在治疗抑郁症方面不劣于10 Hz rTMS [23] 。

本研究结果显示,iTBS组患者治疗后的HAMD-24、MADRS评分较治疗前均有明显下降,且差异有统计学意义;两组间比较,iTBS组下降幅度更明显。

7. 结论

综上所述,我们发现iTBS在改善PSD患者抑郁情绪方面有良好效果,且较单纯药物治疗效果更佳。

创新性和局限性

在本研究中,我们创新性地使用客观评价指标P300潜伏期测定来作为评价指标,有效避免了仅仅量表评定的主观性,让研究方法和结论更加科学。但仍应考虑到一些局限性:一个是样本量较小,在后续的研究中应增加样本量;另一个是没有对研究对象进行长期随访以关注持续性效果对比。

文章引用

董 捷,韩 婕,毕耘枫,李 江,徐子涵,郑雅文,刘 冬. 间歇性Theta脉冲刺激对卒中后抑郁患者的临床疗效研究
Clinical Efficacy of Intermittent Theta Pulse Stimulation in Patients with Post-Stroke Depression[J]. 临床医学进展, 2023, 13(12): 20197-20203. https://doi.org/10.12677/ACM.2023.13122843

参考文献

  1. 1. Das, J. and Rajanikant, G.K. (2018) Post Stroke Depression: The Sequelae of Cerebral Stroke. Neuroscience and Biobe-havioral Reviews, 90, 104-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2018.04.005

  2. 2. Jeong, Y.J., Kim, W.C., Kim, Y.S., Choi, K.W., Son, S.Y. and Jeong, Y.G. (2014) The Relationship between Rehabilitation and Changes in Depres-sion in Stroke Patients. The Journal of Physical Therapy Science, 26, 1263-1266. https://doi.org/10.1589/jpts.26.1263

  3. 3. Mitchell, A.J., Sheth, B., Gill, J., Yadegarfar, M., Stubbs, B., Yadegarfar, M. and Meader, N. (2017) Prevalence and Predictors of Post-Stroke Mood Disorders: A Meta-Analysis and Me-ta-Regression of Depression, Anxiety and Adjustment Disorder. General Hospital Psychiatry, 47, 48-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2017.04.001

  4. 4. 齐士魁, 高静, 余明月, 等. 脑卒中后抑郁发病机制的研究进展[J]. 卒中与神经疾病, 2022, 29(5): 483-486.

  5. 5. Gutiérrez-Muto, A.M., Castilla, J., Freire, M., et al. (2020) Theta Burst Stimulation: Technical Aspects about TMS Devices. Brain Stimulation, 13, 562-564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2020.01.002

  6. 6. Tripathi, S.M., Mishra, N., Tripathi, R.K., et al. (2015) P300 Laten-cy as an Indicator of Severity in Major Depressive Disorder. Industrial Psychiatry Journal, 24, 163-167. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-6748.181726

  7. 7. Nan, C., Wang, G., Wang, H., et al. (2018) The P300 Component Decreases in a Bimodal Oddball Task in Individuals with Depression: An Event-Related Potentials Study. Clinical Neu-rophysiology: Official Journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology, 129, 2525-2533. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2018.09.012

  8. 8. Zhou, L., Wang, G. and Wang, H. (2018) Abnormalities of P300 before and after Antidepressant Treatment in Depression: An ERP-sLORETA Study. NeuroReport, 29, 160-168. https://doi.org/10.1097/WNR.0000000000000945

  9. 9. Oberman, L.M. and Pascual-Leone, A. (2009) Report of Seizure Induced by Continuous Theta Burst Stimulation. Brain Stimulation, 2, 246-247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2009.03.003

  10. 10. Rossi, S., Antal, A., Bestmann, S., et al. (2021) Safety and Recom-mendations for TMS Use in Healthy Subjects and Patient Populations, with Updates on Training, Ethical and Regulatory Issues: Expert Guidelines. Clinical Neurophysiology, 132, 269-306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2020.10.003

  11. 11. Van de Weg, F.B., Kuik, D.J. and Lankhorst, G.J. (1999) Post-Stroke Depression and Functional Outcome: A Cohort Study Investigating the Influence of Depression on Func-tional Recovery from Stroke. Clinical Rehabilitation, 13, 268- 272. https://doi.org/10.1191/026921599672495022

  12. 12. Swartz, R.H., Bayley, M., Lanctot, K.L., Murray, B.J., Cayley, M.L., Lien, K., et al. (2016) Post-Stroke Depression, Obstructive Sleep Apnea, and Cognitive Impairment: Rationale for, and Barriers to, Routine Screening. International Journal of Stroke, 11, 509-518. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747493016641968

  13. 13. Trivedi, M.H., Rush, A.J., Wisniewski, S.R., Nierenberg, A.A., Warden, D., Ritz, L., Norquist, G., Howland, R.H., Lebowitz, B., McGrath, P.J., Shores-Wilson, K., Biggs, M.M., Bal-asubramani, G.K. and Fava, M. (2006) Evaluation of Outcomes with Citalopram for Depression Using Measure-ment-Based Care in STAR*D: Implications for Clinical Practice. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 163, 28-40. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.163.1.28

  14. 14. Juang, H.T., Chen, P.C. and Chien, K.L. (2015) Using Antidepres-sants and the Risk of Stroke Recurrence: Report from a National Representative Cohort Study. BMC Neurology, 15, Ar-ticle No. 86. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-015-0345-x

  15. 15. Richter, D., Charles James, J., Ebert, A., Katsanos, A.H., Ma-zul-Wach, L., Ruland, Q., Gold, R., Juckel, G. and Krogias, C. (2021) Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors for the Prevention of Post-Stroke Depression: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 10, Arti-cle No. 5912. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10245912

  16. 16. Hordacre, B., Comacchio, K., Williams, L. and Hillier, S. (2021) Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Post-Stroke Depression: A Randomised Trial with Neurophysi-ological Insight. Journal of Neurology, 268, 1474-1484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-020-10315-6

  17. 17. Tomeh, A., Yusof Khan, A.H.K. and Wan Sulaiman, W.A. (2022) Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation of the Primary Motor Cortex in Stroke Survivors—More than Mo-tor Rehabilitation: A Mini-Review. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 14, Article ID: 897837. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2022.897837

  18. 18. Huang, Y.Z., Rothwell, J.C., Lu, C.S., Wang, J., et al. (2009) The Effect of Continuous Theta Burst Stimulation over Premotor Cortex on Circuits in Primary Motor Cortex and Spinal Cord. Clinical Neurophysiology, 120, 796-801. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2009.01.003

  19. 19. Chistyakov, A.V., Rubicsek, O., Kaplan, B., Zaaroor, M. and Klein, E. (2010) Safety, Tolerability and Preliminary Evidence for Antidepressant Efficacy of Theta-Burst Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Patients with Major Depression. International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology, 13, 387-393. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1461145710000027

  20. 20. Holzer, M. and Padberg, F. (2010) Intermittent Theta-Burst Stimulation (iTBS) Ameliorates Therapy Resistant Depression: A Case Series. Brain Stimulation, 3, 181-183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2009.10.004

  21. 21. Li, C.T., Chen, M.H., Juan, C.H., et al. (2014) Efficacy of Prefrontal Theta-Burst Stimulation in Refractory Depression: A Randomized Sham-Controlled Study. Brain, 137, 2088-2098. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awu109

  22. 22. O’Reardon, J.P., Solvason, H.B., Janicak, P.G., et al. (2007) Efficacy and Safety of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in the Acute Treatment of Major Depression: A Multisite Randomized Controlled Trial. Biological Psychiatry, 62, 1208-1216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2007.01.018

  23. 23. Blumberger, D.M., Vila-Rodriguez, F., Thorpe, K.E., et al. (2018) Effectiveness of Theta-Burst versus High-Fre- quency Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Patients with Depression (THREE-D): A Randomised Non- Inferiority Trial. The Lancet, 391, 1683-1692. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30295-2

期刊菜单