Thursday, October 21, 2010

Shock and Cure - With Magnets

Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is the oldest treatment in psychiatry that's still in use today. ECT uses a brief electrical current to induce a generalized seizure. No-one knows why, but in many cases this rapidly alleviates depression - amongst other things.

The problem with ECT is that it may cause memory loss. It's hotly debated how serious of a problem this is, and most psychiatrists agree that the risk is justified if the alternative is untreatable illness, but it's fair to say that whether or not it's not as bad as some people believe, the fear that it might be, is the main limitation to the use of the treatment.

Wouldn't it be handy if there was a way of getting the benefits of ECT without the risk of side effects? To that end, people have tried tinkering with the specifics of the electrical stimulation - the frequency and waveform of the current, the location of the electrodes, etc. - but unfortunately it seems like the settings that work best, tend to be the ones with the most side effects.

Enter magnetic seizure therapy (MST). As the name suggests, this is like ECT, except it uses powerful magnets, instead of electrical current, to cause the seizures. In fact though, the magnets work by creating electrical currents in the brain by electromagnetic induction, so it's not entirely different.

MST is thought to be more selective than ECT, in that it induces seizures in the surface of the brain - the cerebral cortex - but not the hippocampus, and other structures buried deeper in the brain, which are involved in memory.

It was first proposed in 2001, and since then it's been tested in a number of very small trials in monkeys and people. Now a group of German psychiatrists say that it's as effective as ECT, but with fewer side effects, in a new trial of 20 severely depressed people. Ironically, they work on Sigmund Freud Street, Bonn. I am not sure what Freud would say about this.

The trial was randomized, but not blinded: it's hard to blind people to this because the equipment used looks completely different. Nor was there a placebo group. All the patients had failed to improve with multiple antidepressants, and psychotherapy in almost all cases, and were therefore eligible for ECT. If anything, the MST group were slightly more ill than the ECT group at baseline.

The ECT they used was right unilateral. This is probably not quite as effective as stimulation which targets both sides of the brain (bitemporal or bifrontal), but has fewer side-effects.

So what happened? After 12 sessions, MST and ECT both seemed to work, and they were equally effective on average. Some patients got much better, some only got a bit better.

What about side effects? MST was noticeably "gentler", in that it didn't cause headaches or muscle pain, and people recovered from the seizures much faster (2 minutes vs 8 minutes to reorientation) after MST. This may have been because the seizures (as assessed using EEG) were less intense.

In terms of the all-important memory and cognitive side effects, however, it's not clear what was going on. They used a whole bunch of neuropsychological tests. In some of them, people got worse over the course of the sessions. In others, they got better. But in several, the scores went up and down with no meaningful pattern. If anything the MST group seemed to do a bit better but to be honest it's impossible to tell because there's so much data and it's so messy.

Unfortunately the tests they used have been criticized for not picking up the kinds of memory problems that some ECT patients complain of e.g. the "wiping" of old memories. For some reason they didn't just ask people whether they felt their memory was damaged or not.

Overall, this trial confirms that MST is a promising idea, but it remains to be seen whether it has any meaningful advantages over old school shock therapy...

ResearchBlogging.orgKayser S, Bewernick BH, Grubert C, Hadrysiewicz BL, Axmacher N, & Schlaepfer TE (2010). Antidepressant effects, of magnetic seizure therapy and electroconvulsive therapy, in treatment-resistant depression. Journal of psychiatric research PMID: 20951997

Shock and Cure - With Magnets

Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is the oldest treatment in psychiatry that's still in use today. ECT uses a brief electrical current to induce a generalized seizure. No-one knows why, but in many cases this rapidly alleviates depression - amongst other things.

The problem with ECT is that it may cause memory loss. It's hotly debated how serious of a problem this is, and most psychiatrists agree that the risk is justified if the alternative is untreatable illness, but it's fair to say that whether or not it's not as bad as some people believe, the fear that it might be, is the main limitation to the use of the treatment.

Wouldn't it be handy if there was a way of getting the benefits of ECT without the risk of side effects? To that end, people have tried tinkering with the specifics of the electrical stimulation - the frequency and waveform of the current, the location of the electrodes, etc. - but unfortunately it seems like the settings that work best, tend to be the ones with the most side effects.

Enter magnetic seizure therapy (MST). As the name suggests, this is like ECT, except it uses powerful magnets, instead of electrical current, to cause the seizures. In fact though, the magnets work by creating electrical currents in the brain by electromagnetic induction, so it's not entirely different.

MST is thought to be more selective than ECT, in that it induces seizures in the surface of the brain - the cerebral cortex - but not the hippocampus, and other structures buried deeper in the brain, which are involved in memory.

It was first proposed in 2001, and since then it's been tested in a number of very small trials in monkeys and people. Now a group of German psychiatrists say that it's as effective as ECT, but with fewer side effects, in a new trial of 20 severely depressed people. Ironically, they work on Sigmund Freud Street, Bonn. I am not sure what Freud would say about this.

The trial was randomized, but not blinded: it's hard to blind people to this because the equipment used looks completely different. Nor was there a placebo group. All the patients had failed to improve with multiple antidepressants, and psychotherapy in almost all cases, and were therefore eligible for ECT. If anything, the MST group were slightly more ill than the ECT group at baseline.

The ECT they used was right unilateral. This is probably not quite as effective as stimulation which targets both sides of the brain (bitemporal or bifrontal), but has fewer side-effects.

So what happened? After 12 sessions, MST and ECT both seemed to work, and they were equally effective on average. Some patients got much better, some only got a bit better.

What about side effects? MST was noticeably "gentler", in that it didn't cause headaches or muscle pain, and people recovered from the seizures much faster (2 minutes vs 8 minutes to reorientation) after MST. This may have been because the seizures (as assessed using EEG) were less intense.

In terms of the all-important memory and cognitive side effects, however, it's not clear what was going on. They used a whole bunch of neuropsychological tests. In some of them, people got worse over the course of the sessions. In others, they got better. But in several, the scores went up and down with no meaningful pattern. If anything the MST group seemed to do a bit better but to be honest it's impossible to tell because there's so much data and it's so messy.

Unfortunately the tests they used have been criticized for not picking up the kinds of memory problems that some ECT patients complain of e.g. the "wiping" of old memories. For some reason they didn't just ask people whether they felt their memory was damaged or not.

Overall, this trial confirms that MST is a promising idea, but it remains to be seen whether it has any meaningful advantages over old school shock therapy...

ResearchBlogging.orgKayser S, Bewernick BH, Grubert C, Hadrysiewicz BL, Axmacher N, & Schlaepfer TE (2010). Antidepressant effects, of magnetic seizure therapy and electroconvulsive therapy, in treatment-resistant depression. Journal of psychiatric research PMID: 20951997

Wednesday, October 20, 2010

Love Stitched Giveaway



Linda is hosting a giveawy for Love Stitched. I really like the Mini Lou hair pins. So pretty! But everything in Love Stitched's shop is beautiful. I hope I win! You can enter here. :) C

You Read It Here First...Again

A couple of months ago I pointed out that a Letter published in the American Journal of Psychiatry, critiquing a certain paper about antidepressants, made very similar points to the ones that I did in my blog post about the paper. The biggest difference was that my post came out 9 months sooner.


Well, it's happened again. Except I was only 3 months ahead this time. Remember my post Clever New Scheme, criticizing a study which claimed to have found a brilliant way of deciding which antidepressant is right for someone, based on their brain activity?

That post went up on July 21st. Yesterday, October 19th, a Letter was published by the journal that ran the original paper. Three months ago, I said -
...there were two groups in this trial and they got entirely different sets of drugs. One group also got rEEG-based treatment personalization. That group did better, but that might have nothing to do with the rEEG...

...it would have been very simple to avoid this issue. Just give everyone rEEG, but shuffle the assignments in the control group, so that everyone was guided by someone else's EEG...

This would be a genuinely controlled test of the personalized rEEG system, because both groups would get the same kinds of drugs... Second, it would allow the trial to be double-blind: in this study the investigators knew which group people were in, because it was obvious from the drug choice... Thirdly, it wouldn't have meant they had to exclude people whose rEEG recommended they get the same treatment that they would have got in the control group...
Now Alexander C. Tsai says, in his Letter:
DeBattista et al. chose a study design that conflates the effect of rEEG-guided pharmacotherapy with the effects of differing medication regimes...
A more definitive study design would have been one in which study participants were randomized to receive rEEG-guided pharmacotherapy vs. sham rEEG-guided pharmacotherapy.

Such a study design could have been genuinely double blinded,
would not have required the inclusion of potential subjects whose rEEG treatment regimen was different from the control, and would be more likely to result in medication regimens that were balanced on average across the intervention vs. control arms.
To be fair, he also makes a separate point questioning how meaningful the small between-group difference was.

I'm mentioning this not because I want to show off, or to accuse Tsai of ripping me off, but because it's a good example of why people like Royce Murray are wrong. Murray recently wrote an editorial in the academic journal Analytical Chemistry, accusing blogging of being unreliable compared to proper, peer-reviewed science.

Murray is certainly right that one could use a blog as a platform to push crap ideas, but one can also use peer reviewed papers to do that, and often it's bloggers who are the first to pick up on this when it happens.

ResearchBlogging.orgTsai AC (2010). Unclear clinical significance of findings on the use of referenced-EEG-guided pharmacotherapy. Journal of psychiatric research PMID: 20943234

You Read It Here First...Again

A couple of months ago I pointed out that a Letter published in the American Journal of Psychiatry, critiquing a certain paper about antidepressants, made very similar points to the ones that I did in my blog post about the paper. The biggest difference was that my post came out 9 months sooner.


Well, it's happened again. Except I was only 3 months ahead this time. Remember my post Clever New Scheme, criticizing a study which claimed to have found a brilliant way of deciding which antidepressant is right for someone, based on their brain activity?

That post went up on July 21st. Yesterday, October 19th, a Letter was published by the journal that ran the original paper. Three months ago, I said -
...there were two groups in this trial and they got entirely different sets of drugs. One group also got rEEG-based treatment personalization. That group did better, but that might have nothing to do with the rEEG...

...it would have been very simple to avoid this issue. Just give everyone rEEG, but shuffle the assignments in the control group, so that everyone was guided by someone else's EEG...

This would be a genuinely controlled test of the personalized rEEG system, because both groups would get the same kinds of drugs... Second, it would allow the trial to be double-blind: in this study the investigators knew which group people were in, because it was obvious from the drug choice... Thirdly, it wouldn't have meant they had to exclude people whose rEEG recommended they get the same treatment that they would have got in the control group...
Now Alexander C. Tsai says, in his Letter:
DeBattista et al. chose a study design that conflates the effect of rEEG-guided pharmacotherapy with the effects of differing medication regimes...
A more definitive study design would have been one in which study participants were randomized to receive rEEG-guided pharmacotherapy vs. sham rEEG-guided pharmacotherapy.

Such a study design could have been genuinely double blinded,
would not have required the inclusion of potential subjects whose rEEG treatment regimen was different from the control, and would be more likely to result in medication regimens that were balanced on average across the intervention vs. control arms.
To be fair, he also makes a separate point questioning how meaningful the small between-group difference was.

I'm mentioning this not because I want to show off, or to accuse Tsai of ripping me off, but because it's a good example of why people like Royce Murray are wrong. Murray recently wrote an editorial in the academic journal Analytical Chemistry, accusing blogging of being unreliable compared to proper, peer-reviewed science.

Murray is certainly right that one could use a blog as a platform to push crap ideas, but one can also use peer reviewed papers to do that, and often it's bloggers who are the first to pick up on this when it happens.

ResearchBlogging.orgTsai AC (2010). Unclear clinical significance of findings on the use of referenced-EEG-guided pharmacotherapy. Journal of psychiatric research PMID: 20943234

Tuesday, October 19, 2010

FORTALEZA- PARTE III

PRAIA DO CUMBUCO
http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT0PldvzBUDvGbusujxRq6MD702xM3kVpbk__FN4eUhDN0xKEE&t=1&usg=__wC3_SPJTqU4-1VpMhreCIo1z8MI=
Cumbuco seria advindo de cumbuca, uma espécie de cabaça utilizada na cozinha. Mas, isso pouco importa diante da beleza da praia, a mais atraente do município de Caucaia, na Região Metropolitana de FORTALEZA.
http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQdN6043qlS-4C4giAbHgSw7muZ0MD1zvc2nK0fdFmgvfw4I8Y&t=1&usg=__wEUYn7f88RCWlE5WLQHvm3NyOBs=
Cumbuco é uma praia maravilhosa, distante a 41 quilômetros de Fortaleza
http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRXZGbNaQuv3hbEaldR36HiP2ndQxD9jHhLsipogdTfL3cBo3E&t=1&usg=___yMhloIw5fImEa0mUajbYz5bMqc=

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRhqmCocLQmd_uWVFVzn0UdKUepp3GAZ7zeGBUstwlG9-9YpJM&t=1&usg=__MVIlBt3LJt9Avwn2lqdwSP5KfLk=



http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSOUOBxaYzb2f6cLyNz1FWEC9pTBAhR21uh94WlP9TkvdQfoyc&t=1&usg=__7xyG2Ms8s_88_YNTAtcWQtM1r0w=

MUITA ALEGRIA

UM BOM MOMENTO...


UM DESCANSO...

DE VOLTA A FORTALEZAS..FOMOS AS COMP
RAS...

UMA VERDADEIRA LOUCURA.
POVO DE TODOS OS CANTOS DO NOSSO BRAS
IL...
HORA DE VOLTAR..FICA A SAUDADE!!!

FOI MUITO BOM. VALEU A PENA. EMBORA TODO O MEDO DO AVIÃO.. FOI MUITO COMPENSADOR..NÃO TEM EMOÇÃO MAIOR. VIVER É UM PRAZER...SER FELIZ É MUITO MAIS. UMA GRANDE RAZÃO DE SER....
SÃO 400 FOTOS TIRADAS. MAS POSTEI ALGUMAS PARA MOSTRAR UM POUQUINHO DAS BELEZAS BRASILEIRAS. TENHO CERTEZA QUE MUITO MAIS VIRÃO. AMIGOS!
FICAREI UNS DIAS SEM POSTAR.
MAS DEIXO UM GRANDE ABRAÇO A TODOS. ASSIM QUE FOR POSSÍVEL RETORNAREI E VOU TE VISITAR. DEIXO AQUI O MEU AGRADECIMENTO PELA VISITA E CARINHO. UM FORTE ABRAÇO. ATÉ MAIS.
SE VOCÊ AINDA NÃO VIU TODAS AS FOTOS É SÓ DESCER NAS POSTAGENS ABAIXO.

AGRADEÇO A SUA COMPANHIA!!!Clique Aqui e veja mais imagens

Blog Coletivo-Uma Interação de Amigos- JÁ NOVO TEMA...COMPARTILHE.

MEUS MIMOS/SEUS PRESENTES- VOU TE ESPERAR POR LÁ.

Sinal de Liberdade-uma expressão de sentimento-

Monday, October 18, 2010

FORTALEZA- II PARTE

MOMENTOS INESQUECÍVEIS!!!!!
DEPOIS DO MEDO DO AVIÃO AS BELEZAS DO CEARA ME DEIXOU EM PAZ NA TERRA FIRME.
A VIDA É BELA ...MARAVILHOSA..LINDA. VALE A PENA!!!!!



Beach Park Praia
http://www.intravel.com.br/upload/154.jpg
Com uma imensa área ao ar livre, o Beach Park Praia fica localizado entre os dois resort e ao lado do parque aquático, e conta com uma completa estrutura para receber os visitantes à beira mar, com serviços de alimentação e lazer e toda a comodidade e conforto, no melhor clima da praia.

PRAIA DE MORRO BRANCOhttp://www.ceara.com/common/jandada01.jpg
Basta uma primeira visita para se apaixonar pela praia do Morro Branco. São vários os atrativos que o local oferece, agradando quem procura diversão, aventura ou tranqüilidade. As falésias se estendem à beira-mar, formando labirintos por onde os visitantes podem passear e observar areias de várias cores.


Morro Branco fica a 89 km de Fortaleza, Por toda extensão da praia os visitantes podem tomar banho em bicas naturais de água doce que saem das falésias. No mar, jangadas saem para alto mar em busca de peixes e frutos do mar, que podem ser apreciados nas barracas de praia do Morro Branco. Já os que procuram aventura, contratam bugueiros para conhecer as emoções que as dunas do Morro Branco proporcionam.
http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQN8jQaHwO8sWR9DB8wWV9jos5H3wG0i9rZfOsm_nvXOHSqvc4&t=1&usg=__A0GrJdcuaGUKYaZutU1cdriE-s8=


AS FALESIAS


LOGO POSTAREI MAIS UM POUQUINHO. DEIXO UM BEIJO CARINHOSO A TODOS.

AGRADEÇO A SUA COMPANHIA!!!Clique Aqui e veja mais imagens

Blog Coletivo-Uma Interação de Amigos- JÁ NOVO TEMA...COMPARTILHE.

MEUS MIMOS/SEUS PRESENTES- VOU TE ESPERAR POR LÁ.

Sinal de Liberdade-uma expressão de sentimento-