Cognitive enhancing effect of rTMS combined with tDCS in patients with major depressive disorder: a double-blind, randomized, sham-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive dysfunction is one of the common symptoms in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) have been studied separately in the treatment of cognitive dysfunction in MDD patients. We aimed to investigate the effectiveness and safety of rTMS combined with tDCS as a new therapy to improve neurocognitive impairment in MDD patients. METHODS: In this brief 2-week, double-blind, randomized, and sham-controlled trial, a total of 550 patients were screened, and 240 MDD inpatients were randomized into four groups (active rTMS + active tDCS, active rTMS + sham tDCS, sham rTMS + active tDCS, sham rTMS + sham tDCS). Finally, 203 patients completed the study and received 10 treatment sessions over a 2-week period. The Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) was performed to assess patients' cognitive function at baseline and week 2. Also, we applied the 24-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-24) to assess patients' depressive symptoms at baseline and week 2. RESULTS: After 10 sessions of treatment, the rTMS combined with the tDCS group showed more significant improvements in the RBANS total score, immediate memory, and visuospatial/constructional index score (all p < 0.05). Moreover, post hoc tests revealed a significant increase in the RBANS total score and Visuospatial/Constructional in the combined treatment group compared to the other three groups but in the immediate memory, the combined treatment group only showed a better improvement than the sham group. The results also showed the RBANS total score increased significantly higher in the active rTMS group compared with the sham group. However, rTMS or tDCS alone was not superior to the sham group in terms of other cognitive performance. In addition, the rTMS combined with the tDCS group showed a greater reduction in HDRS-24 total score and a better depression response rate than the other three groups. CONCLUSIONS: rTMS combined with tDCS treatment is more effective than any single intervention in treating cognitive dysfunction and depressive symptoms in MDD patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2100052122).

Association of empathy with clinical symptoms and cognitive function in chronic schizophrenia patients with and without suicide attempts.

Cognitive impairment is recognized as a risk factor for suicide in schizophrenia (SZ) patients. Despite empathy being an important aspect of social cognition, the association between suicidal behavior and empathy has received little attention. We aimed to compare empathy and neurocognition in SZ patients with and without suicide attempts (SAs), and to explore the relationship between empathy, neurocognition, and clinical symptoms in SZ patients with and without SAs. Data on SAs and socio-demographic characteristics were collected from 628 chronic SZ patients. The patients' symptomatology was measured by the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). Empathy and neurocognition were assessed with the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) and Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS), respectively. Patients with SAs performed better on all IRI domains (except for Perspective Taking) and total scores. Regression results showed that negative symptoms, positive symptoms, and duration of illness were independently associated with IRI total score in patients without SAs (adjusted R2 = 0.048). In patients without SAs, negative symptoms, general psychopathology, education, age, and sex were independently associated with RBANS total score (adjusted R2 = 0.265), while in patients with SAs, education, PANSS total score, and age at onset were independently associated with RBANS total score (adjusted R2 = 0.456). Our results show that SZ patients with SAs may have better empathic performance than patients without SAs. In chronic SZ patients, negative and positive symptoms may have different effects on cognition in the SAs and non-SAs groups.

Transperitoneal vs retroperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: a double-arm, parallel-group randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of patients undergoing Retroperitoneal laparoscopic Radical nephrectomy (RLRN) and Transperitoneal laparoscopic Radical nephrectomy (TLRN). METHODS: A total of 120 patients with localized renal cell carcinoma were randomized into either RLRN or TLRN group. Mainly by comparing the patient perioperative related data, surgical specimen integrity, pathological results and tumor results. RESULTS: Each group comprised 60 patients. The two group were equivalent in terms of perioperative and pathological outcomes. The mean integrity score was significantly lower in the RLRN group than TLRN group. With a median follow-up of 36.4 months after the operation, Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed no significant difference between RLRN and TLRN in overall survival (89.8% vs. 88.5%; P = 0.898), recurrence-free survival (77.9% vs. 87.7%; P = 0.180), and cancer-specific survival (91.4% vs. 98.3%; P = 0.153). In clinical T2 subgroup, the recurrence rate and recurrence-free survival in the RLRN group was significantly worse than that in the TLRN group (43.2% vs. 76.7%, P = 0.046). Univariate and multivariate COX regression analysis showed that RLRN (HR: 3.35; 95%CI: 1.12-10.03; P = 0.030), male (HR: 4.01; 95%CI: 1.07-14.99; P = 0.039) and tumor size (HR: 1.23; 95%CI: 1.01-1.51; P = 0.042) were independent risk factor for recurrence-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that although RLRN versus TLRN had roughly similar efficacy, TLRN outperformed RLRN in terms of surgical specimen integrity. TLRN was also significantly better than RLRN in controlling tumor recurrence for clinical T2 and above cases. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ( https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=24400 ), identifier: ChiCTR1800014431, date: 13/01/2018.