Evidence Hub

Challenging the Pleiotropic Effects of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Geriatric Depression: A Multimodal Case Series Study

Nicoletti VG, Fisicaro F, Aguglia E, Bella R, Calcagno D, Cantone M, Concerto C, Ferri R et al.

Biomedicines, 2023

17 citations

Abstract

Background: Although the antidepressant potential of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), the pleiotropic effects in geriatric depression (GD) are poorly investigated. We tested rTMS on depression, cognitive performance, growth/neurotrophic factors, cerebral blood flow (CBF) to transcranial Doppler sonography (TCD), and motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) to TMS in GD.

Methods: In this case series study, six drug-resistant subjects (median age 68.0 years) underwent MEPs at baseline and after 3 weeks of 10 Hz rTMS on the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. The percentage change of serum nerve growth factor, vascular endothelial growth factor, brain-derived growth factor, insulin-like growth factor-1, and angiogenin was obtained. Assessments were performed at baseline, and at the end of rTMS; psychocognitive tests were also repeated after 1, 3, and 6 months.

Results: Chronic cerebrovascular disease was evident in five patients. No adverse/undesirable effect was reported. An improvement in mood was observed after rTMS but not at follow-up. Electrophysiological data to TMS remained unchanged, except for an increase in the right median MEP amplitude. TCD and neurotrophic/growth factors did not change.

Conclusions: We were unable to detect a relevant impact of high-frequency rTMS on mood, cognition, cortical microcircuits, neurotrophic/growth factors, and CBF. Cerebrovascular disease and exposure to multiple pharmacological treatments might have contributed.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free