RESUMO
Background: Extensive research has reported that electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) can be highly effective in approximately 80% of patients suffering from depression. Its clinical use is mainly limited by historical objections and the concern about unwanted adverse effects (AEs), including serious and potentially life-threatening adverse events (pLTAEs), induced either by ECT or by anesthesia. Objective risk estimation is, therefore, a decisive factor in determining an indication for ECT. Methods: This paper presents a retrospective analysis of 3-year safety protocols and patient files of 157 patients who received a total of 3,106 ECT applications in a psychiatric inpatient setting at a psychiatric community hospital. This patient group comprises 5.3% of inpatients admitted with comparable diagnoses. Adverse events were analyzed from standardized safety protocols and patient files with a focus on pLTAEs. Results: Adverse events were reported for 30 (19.1%) of the 157 participants during 39 (6.1%) of 641 hospital stays. Serious pLTAEs occurred during three electroconvulsive stimulations in three patients, who needed action through the administration of medication or mechanical respiration. No patient suffered permanent damage to health, and no patient died. The incidence of these and other AEs was independent of sex, age, and diagnosis of patients, and anesthesia medication. Minor AEs occurred more often with higher stimulus doses and an increasing number of treatments. Conclusion: The low incidence rate of 0.097% of serious pLTAEs that require medical action may allow the conclusion that ECT is a rather safe treatment when performed in a controlled setting. The beneficial risk profile of ECT performed in the standard care of psychiatric hospitals suggests a more generous indication of this treatment method. We recommend that ECT facilities collect individual safety data to allow a reliable judgment of their institutional ECT risk profile.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Although electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is considered a safe and highly effective treatment option for major depressive disorder, there are still some reservations with regard to possible adverse cognitive adverse effects. This is the case despite a large body of evidence showing that these deficits are transient and that there even seems to be a long-term improvement of cognitive functioning level. However, most data concerning cognitive adverse effects stem from studies using mixed samples of treatment-resistant and non-treatment-resistant as well as ECT-naive and non-ECT-naive subjects. Furthermore, neurocognitive measures might partly be sensitive to practice effects and improvements in depressive symptom level. METHODS: We examined neurocognitive performance in a sample of 20 treatment-resistant and ECT-naive subjects using repeatable neurocognitive tests, whereas changes in depressive symptom level were controlled. Cognitive functioning level was assessed before (baseline), 1 week, and 6 months (follow-up 1 and 2) after (12 to) 15 sessions of unilateral ECT treatment. RESULTS: No adverse cognitive effects were observed in any of the cognitive domains examined. Instead, a significant improvement in verbal working memory performance was found from baseline to follow-up 2. When changes in depressive symptom levels were controlled statistically, this improvement was no longer seen. CONCLUSIONS: Although findings that ECT does not lead to longer lasting cognitive deficits caused by ECT were confirmed, our study adds evidence that previous results of a beneficial effect of ECT on cognition might be questioned.
