Cognitive effects of brief and ultrabrief pulse bitemporal electroconvulsive therapy: a randomised controlled proof-of-concept trial.

BACKGROUND: Reduction of the pulse width has been reported to improve ECT outcomes with unilateral ECT (similar efficacy, fewer cognitive side effects), but has been minimally studied for bitemporal ECT. The only study comparing brief and ultrabrief pulse bitemporal ECT found reduced efficacy for bitemporal ultrabrief compared to bitemporal brief pulse stimulation. This randomised controlled trial (RCT) aimed to test if ultrabrief pulse bitemporal ECT results in fewer cognitive side effects than brief pulse bitemporal ECT, when given at doses adjusted with the aim of achieving comparable efficacy. METHODS: Thirty-six participants were randomly assigned to receive ultrabrief (at 3 times seizure threshold) or brief (at 1.5 times seizure threshold) pulse bitemporal ECT given 3 times a week in a double-blind, controlled proof-of-concept trial. Blinded raters assessed mood and cognitive functioning over the ECT course. RESULTS: Efficacy and cognitive outcomes did not differ significantly between the two treatment groups over the ECT course. The ultrabrief pulse group performed better on a test of visual memory assessed acutely after an ECT treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests there may be a small cognitive advantage in giving bitemporal ECT with an ultrabrief pulse when dosage is increased to match the efficacy of brief pulse bitemporal ECT, but the study was underpowered to fully examine this issue.Clinical Trials Registration: www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00870805.

Effects of the Anaesthetic-ECT time interval and ventilation rate on seizure quality in electroconvulsive therapy: A prospective randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: The anaesthetic approach adopted in ECT practice has the potential to influence patient outcomes. However, the impact of the time interval between anaesthetic induction and ECT stimulus administration has not been studied prospectively to date. This variable may represent an indirect measure of anaesthetic concentration at the time of stimulation, and therefore may influence the quality of seizures induced. OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of the anaesthetic to ECT stimulus time interval, and ventilation rate pre-treatment, on ictal seizure quality. METHODS: In a prospective, crossover trial, 54 depressed participants were randomised to variations in anaesthetic technique at four sequential ECT treatment sessions, in a 2 x 2 design: randomisation to a short or long anaesthetic-ECT time interval, and randomisation to normal ventilation or hyperventilation during anaesthetic induction with thiopentone. Ictal EEG data were collected at each study session and assessed by a blinded rater for ictal quality (seizure amplitude, regularity, post-ictal suppression and general seizure quality), using a quantitative-qualitative structured rating scale. Linear mixed effects models were used to analyse the effect of the anaesthetic-ECT time interval, and that of ventilation rate, on seizure quality indices. RESULTS: The anaesthetic-ECT time interval had a significant impact on ictal EEG quality indices (p < 0.01), with longer time intervals producing higher quality seizures. Ventilation rate did not significantly influence quality measures. CONCLUSION: The time between anaesthetic induction and ECT stimulus administration has a significant impact on ictal EEG seizure quality. Conversely, manipulations of ventilation rate did not significantly affect seizure quality. These results suggest the anaesthetic-ECT time interval should be routinely monitored clinically and potentially optimised for maximising seizure quality with ECT.