BERNARDO DE SAMPAIO PEREIRA JUNIOR
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Instituto de Psiquiatria, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina - Médico
6 resultados
Resultados de Busca
Agora exibindo 1 - 6 de 6
- The Influence of Skin Redness on Blinding in Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Studies: A Crossover Trial(2017) EZQUERRO, Fernando; MOFFA, Adriano H.; BIKSON, Marom; KHADKA, Niranjan; APARICIO, Luana V. M.; SAMPAIO-JUNIOR, Bernardo de; FREGNI, Felipe; BENSENOR, Isabela M.; LOTUFO, Paulo A.; PEREIRA, Alexandre Costa; BRUNONI, Andre R.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether and to which extent skin redness (erythema) affects investigator blinding in transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) trials. Material and MethodsTwenty-six volunteers received sham and active tDCS, which was applied with saline-soaked sponges of different thicknesses. High-resolution skin images, taken before and 5, 15, and 30 min after stimulation, were randomized and presented to experienced raters who evaluated erythema intensity and judged on the likelihood of stimulation condition (sham vs. active). In addition, semi-automated image processing generated probability heatmaps and surface area coverage of erythema. Adverse events were also collected. ResultsErythema was present, but less intense in sham compared to active groups. Erythema intensity was inversely and directly associated to correct sham and active stimulation group allocation, respectively. Our image analyses found that erythema also occurs after sham and its distribution is homogenous below electrodes. Tingling frequency was higher using thin compared to thick sponges, whereas erythema was more intense under thick sponges. ConclusionsOptimal investigator blinding is achieved when erythema after tDCS is mild. Erythema distribution under the electrode is patchy, occurs after sham tDCS and varies according to sponge thickness. We discuss methods to address skin erythema-related tDCS unblinding.
- Efficacy and Safety of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation as an Add-on Treatment for Bipolar Depression A Randomized Clinical Trial(2018) SAMPAIO-JUNIOR, Bernardo; TORTELLA, Gabriel; BORRIONE, Lucas; MOFFA, Adriano H.; MACHADO-VIEIRA, Rodrigo; CRETAZ, Eric; SILVA, Adriano Fernandes da; FRAGUAS, Renerio; APARICIO, Luana V.; KLEIN, Izio; LAFER, Beny; GOERIGK, Stephan; BENSENOR, Isabela Martins; LOTUFO, Paulo Andrade; GATTAZ, Wagner F.; BRUNONI, Andre RussowskyIMPORTANCE More effective, tolerable interventions for bipolar depression treatment are needed. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a novel therapeutic modality with few severe adverse events that showed promising results for unipolar depression. OBJECTIVE To determine the efficacy and safety of tDCS as an add-on treatment for bipolar depression. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A randomized, sham-controlled, double-blind trial (the Bipolar Depression Electrical Treatment Trial [BETTER]) was conducted from July 1, 2014, to March 30, 2016, at an outpatient, single-center academic setting. Participants included 59 adults with type I or II bipolar disorder in a major depressive episode and receiving a stable pharmacologic regimen with 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-17) scores higher than 17. Data were analyzed in the intention-to-treat sample. INTERVENTIONS Ten daily 30-minute, 2-mA, anodal-left and cathodal-right prefrontal sessions of active or sham tDCS on weekdays and then 1 session every fortnight until week 6. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Change in HDRS-17 scores at week 6. RESULTS Fifty-nine patients (40 [68%] women), with a mean (SD) age of 45.9 (12) years participated; 36 (61%) with bipolar I and 23 (39%) with bipolar II disorder were randomized and 52 finished the trial. In the intention-to-treat analysis, patients in the active tDCS condition showed significantly superior improvement compared with those receiving sham (beta(int) = -1.68; number needed to treat, 5.8; 95% CI, 3.3-25.8; P = .01). Cumulative response rates were higher in the active vs sham groups (67.6% vs 30.4%; number needed to treat, 2.69; 95% CI, 1.84-4.99; P = .01), but not remission rates (37.4% vs 19.1%; number needed to treat, 5.46; 95% CI, 3.38-14.2; P = .18). Adverse events, including treatment-emergent affective switches, were similar between groups, except for localized skin redness that was higher in the active group (54% vs 19%; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, tDCS was an effective, safe, and tolerable add-on intervention for this small bipolar depression sample. Further trials should examine tDCS efficacy in a larger sample.
- Associations between symptoms of depression and heart rate variability: An exploratory study(2018) BORRIONE, Lucas; BRUNONI, Andre R.; SAMPAIO-JUNIOR, Bernardo; APARICIO, Luana M.; KEMP, Andrew H.; BENSENOR, Isabela; LOTUFO, Paulo A.; FRAGUAS, RenerioMajor depressive disorder (MDD) is associated with decreased heart rate variability (HRV), a predictor of cardiovascular morbidity by many, but not all studies. This inconsistency could be due to the association of HRV with specific depressive symptoms. Here, we investigated the association of HRV parameters with components of depressive symptoms from 120 MDD patients, at baseline of a published trial comparing the effect of sertraline to transcranial direct current stimulation. We used Principal Component Analysis to extract components of the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D-17), the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Beck Inventory for Depressive Symptomatology (BDI). We constructed one equation of multiple linear regression for each HRV parameter as the dependent variable, and the components of depressive symptoms of the three scales as the independent ones, adjusted for age and gender. A component of HAM-D-17 predicted LF/HF (low frequency/high frequency) and a component of MADRS predicted LF (low frequency). ""Guilt"" and ""loss of interest/pleasure in activities"" were present in the components of both scales, and the MADRS component also included ""psychomotor retardation"". These results suggest that melancholic features might be relevant for the association between MDD and HRV. Considering multiple comparisons, these results are preliminary.
- Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for preventing major depressive disorder relapse: Results of a 6-month follow-up(2019) APARICIO, Luana V. M.; ROSA, Vivianne; RAZZA, Lais M.; SAMPAIO-JUNIOR, Bernardo; BORRIONE, Lucas; VALIENGO, Leandro; LOTUFO, Paulo A.; BENSENOR, Isabela M.; FRAGUAS, Renerio; MOFFA, Adriano H.; GATTAZ, Wagner F.; BRUNONI, Andre RussowskyBackgroundThe efficacy of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) as a continuation therapy for the maintenance phase of the depressive episode is low and insufficiently investigated in literature. We investigated whether it could be enhanced by using a more intensive treatment regimen compared to previous reports. MethodsTwenty-four patients (16 with unipolar depression and eight with bipolar depression) who presented acute tDCS response (50% depression improvement in the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale [HDRS]) after receiving 15 tDCS sessions were followed for up to 6 months or until relapse, defined as clinical worsening and/or HDRS>15. Sessions were performed twice a week (maximum of 48 sessions) over 24weeks. The anode and the cathode were positioned over the left and right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (2mA current, 30 min sessions were delivered). We performed Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards ratios to evaluate predictors of relapse. ResultsOut of 24 patients, 18 completed the follow-up period. tDCS treatment was well tolerated. The mean survival duration was 17.5weeks (122 days). The survival rate at the end of follow-up was 73.5% (95% confidence interval, 50-87). A trend (P=0.09) was observed for lower relapse rates in nontreatment- vs. antidepressant treatment-resistant patients (7.7%vs. 45.5%, respectively). No differences in efficacy between unipolar and bipolar depression were observed. ConclusionAn intensive tDCS treatment regimen consisting of sessions twice a week achieved relatively low relapse rates after a 6-month follow up of tDCS responders, particularly for nontreatment-resistant patients.
- Trial of Electrical Direct-Current Therapy versus Escitalopram for Depression(2017) BRUNONI, A. R.; MOFFA, A. H.; SAMPAIO-JUNIOR, B.; BORRIONE, L.; MORENO, M. L.; FERNANDES, R. A.; VERONEZI, B. P.; NOGUEIRA, B. S.; APARICIO, L. V. M.; RAZZA, L. B.; CHAMORRO, R.; TORT, L. C.; FRAGUAS, R.; LOTUFO, P. A.; GATTAZ, W. F.; FREGNI, F.; BENSENOR, I. M.BACKGROUND We compared transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) with a selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitor for the treatment of depression. METHODS In a single-center, double-blind, noninferiority trial involving adults with unipolar depression, we randomly assigned patients to receive tDCS plus oral placebo, sham tDCS plus escitalopram, or sham tDCS plus oral placebo. The tDCS was administered in 30-minute, 2-mA prefrontal stimulation sessions for 15 consecutive weekdays, followed by 7 weekly treatments. Escitalopram was given at a dose of 10 mg per day for 3 weeks and 20 mg per day thereafter. The primary outcome measure was the change in the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-17) score (range, 0 to 52, with higher scores indicating more depression). Noninferiority of tDCS versus escitalopram was defined by a lower boundary of the confidence interval for the difference in the decreased score that was at least 50% of the difference in the scores with placebo versus escitalopram. RESULTS A total of 245 patients underwent randomization, with 91 being assigned to escitalopram, 94 to tDCS, and 60 to placebo. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the mean (+/- SD) decrease in the score from baseline was 11.3 +/- 6.5 points in the escitalopram group, 9.0 +/- 7.1 points in the tDCS group, and 5.8 +/- 7.9 points in the placebo group. The lower boundary of the confidence interval for the difference in the decrease for tDCS versus escitalopram (difference, -2.3 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -4.3 to -0.4; P = 0.69) was lower than the noninferiority margin of -2.75 (50% of placebo minus escitalopram), so noninferiority could not be claimed. Escitalopram and tDCS were both superior to placebo (difference vs. placebo, 5.5 points [95% CI, 3.1 to 7.8; P<0.001] and 3.2 points [95% CI, 0.7 to 5.5; P = 0.01], respectively). Patients receiving tDCS had higher rates of skin redness, tinnitus, and nervousness than did those in the other two groups, and new-onset mania developed in 2 patients in the tDCS group. Patients receiving escitalopram had more frequent sleepiness and obstipation than did those in the other two groups. CONCLUSIONS In a single-center trial, tDCS for the treatment of depression did not show noninferiority to escitalopram over a 10-week period and was associated with more adverse events. (Funded by Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo and others; ELECT-TDCS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01894815.)
- Noninvasive brain stimulation in psychiatric disorders: a primer(2019) BRUNONI, Andre R.; SAMPAIO-JUNIOR, Bernardo; MOFFA, Adriano H.; APARICIO, Luana V.; GORDON, Pedro; KLEIN, Izio; RIOS, Rosa M.; RAZZA, Lais B.; LOO, Colleen; PADBERG, Frank; VALIENGO, LeandroObjective: Noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques, such as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), are increasingly being used to treat mental disorders, particularly major depression. The aim of this comprehensive review is to summarize the main advances, limitations, and perspectives of the field. Methods: We searched PubMed and other databases from inception to July 2017 for articles, particularly systematic reviews and meta-analyses, evaluating the use of NIBS in psychiatric disorders. Results: We reviewed the mechanisms of action, safety, tolerability, efficacy, and relevant clinical parameters of NIBS. Repetitive TMS is already an established technique for the treatment of depression, and there is theoretically room for further methodological development towards a high-end therapeutic intervention. In contrast, tDCS is a technically easier method and therefore potentially suitable for wider clinical use. However the evidence of its antidepressant efficacy is less sound, and a recent study found tDCS to be inferior to antidepressant pharmacotherapy. Clinical trials using rTMS for other mental disorders produced mixed findings, whereas tDCS use has not been sufficiently appraised. Conclusion: The most promising results of NIBS have been obtained for depression. These techniques excel in safety and tolerability, although their efficacy still warrants improvement.