Evidence-based umbrella review of non-invasive brain stimulation in anxiety disorders

• Katia Nunes Sa ^[5] ; Rachel Fontes Baptista ^[6] ; Livia Shirahige ^[1] ; Laís B. Razza ^[7] ; Mateus Nogueira ^[8] ; Maria Helena Faria Coura ^[2] ; Leonardo Afonso-Santos ^[3] ; Clarice Tanaka ^[3] ; Abrahao Fontes Baptista ^[4] ; Katia Monte-Silva ^[1] ; Andre R. Brunoni ^[3]
  1. [1] Universidade Federal de Pernambuco

     Universidade Federal de Pernambuco

     Brasil

     
  2. [2] Universidade Nove de Julho

     Universidade Nove de Julho

     Brasil

     
  3. [3] Universidade de São Paulo

     Universidade de São Paulo

     Brasil

     
  4. [4] Universidade Federal do ABC

     Universidade Federal do ABC

     Brasil

     
  5. [5] NAPeN Network (Nucleo de Assist encia e Pesquisa em Neuromodula ^ c¸ ao), Brazil; Postgraduate and Research, Escola Bahiana de Medicina e Saude P ublica, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil; Psychology Department, Universidade Catolica de Petr opolis, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
  6. [6] NAPeN Network (Nucleo de Assist encia e Pesquisa em Neuromodula ^ c¸ ao), Brazil; Expertise Judicial Service SEJUD (TJ/RJ), Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
  7. [7] NAPeN Network (Nucleo de Assist encia e Pesquisa em Neuromodula ^ c¸ ao), Brazil; Department of Head and Skin, Psychiatry and Medical Psychology and Ghent Experimental Psychiatry Lab, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
  8. [8] NAPeN Network (Nucleo de Assist encia e Pesquisa em Neuromodula ^ c¸ ao), Brazil; Psychology Department, Faculdade Cruzeiro do Sul, Sao Paulo, Brazil

  Mostrar afiliaciones +
• Localización: European journal of psychiatry, ISSN 0213-6163, Vol. 37, Nº 3, 2023, págs. 167-181
• Idioma: inglés
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ejpsy.2023.01.001
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo
• Resumen

  • Background and objectives Although several meta-analyses have suggested the efficacy of non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) mainly in prefrontal brain areas to treat mental disorders, no synthetic approach has been performed for other psychiatric disorders rather than depression. The objective is to assess the available evidence of NIBS in the treatment of anxiety disorders.

    Methods An umbrella review (CRD42021239577) was performed only looking for reviews with meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials using a source strategy MeSH keywords in MEDLINE through Pubmed by two independent researchers. The effects of different methods of NIBS in anxiety disorders were assessed using the PICO strategy. The methodological quality was evaluated using AMSTAR-2 and certainty of evidence using the GRADE-pro framework.

    Results From 136 screening meta-analyses, 16 from 14 studies were included in the final analysis. Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD) and Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) respond best to low frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), while Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) has the largest effect size at high frequency rTMS. Panic Disorder (PD) has no evidence for clinical use of NIBS. There were not identified meta-analyses about other anxiety disorders. In general, the included studies had good methodological quality, but low to moderate evidence for clinical recommendation.

    Conclusion Available evidence reveals NIBS as an effective and safe approach to treat GAD, PTSD and OCD with low recommendation level to clinical application. A great heterogeneity of studies indicates the necessity to develop new randomized clinical trials applying NIBS to treat those and other mental disorders.