Efficacy and safety of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in the treatment of postpartum depression： a Meta-analysis
10.11886/scjsws20250305007
- VernacularTitle:重复经颅磁刺激治疗产后抑郁的效果及安全性的Meta分析
- Author:
Shuang ZHENG
1
;
Luping YANG
1
;
Binyang HUANG
1
;
Miao CAO
1
;
Mengxiao LI
1
;
Wenjun YANG
2
;
Chunliang GUO
3
;
Rongmei ZHENG
4
;
Yuyang ZHANG
1
;
Hua LI
3
Author Information
1. Sichuan Nursing Vocational College， Chengdu 610100， China
2. Sichuan Mental Health Center·The Third Hospital of Mianyang， Mianyang 621000， China
3. Jiangyou People's Hospital， Mianyang 611137， China
4. Guangyuan Mental Health Center， Guangyuan 628000， China
- Publication Type:Review
- Keywords:
Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation;
Postpartum depression;
Meta-analysis
- From:
Sichuan Mental Health
2025;38(6):568-576
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
BackgroundPostpartum depression （PPD） is a prevalent postpartum complications that significantly compromises women's psychological and physical well-being. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation （rTMS）， a conventional neuromodulation technique， has been increasingly used in the treatment of PPD. However， high-quality evidence regarding its efficacy and safety remains limited. ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of rTMS in the treatment of PPD， thereby providing references for clinical treatment. MethodsDatabases including Cochrane Library， PubMed， Embase， CNKI， Wanfang， VIP and China Biology Medicine disc （CBM） were electronically searched for randomized controlled trials （RCTs） on rTMS for PPD， with the search spanning from database inception to February 8， 2025. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions 5.0.1， and the certainty of evidence was graded according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment， Development and Evaluation （GRADE） approach. Meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.3 and Stata 12.0. The outcomes of the Meta-analysis included the total effective rate， Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale （EPDS） score， Hamilton Depression Rating Scale （HAMD） score， and adverse reactions （dizziness， headache， nausea， diarrhea， and the overall incidence of adverse reactions）. ResultsA total of 11 studies involving 729 patients with PPD were included. Meta-analysis results showed that the total effective rate in the study group was significantly higher than that in the control group （OR=5.54， 95% CI： 3.07–10.01， P<0.01）. Both EPDS score （SMD=-2.38， 95% CI： -3.39–-1.37， P<0.01） and HAMD score （SMD=2.53， 95% CI： 1.21–3.85， P<0.01） in the study group were significantly lower than those in the control group， with statistically significant differences. Comparisons between the study group and control group reveal no significant differences in the incidence of dizziness and headache （RR=1.47， 95% CI： 0.63–3.43， P>0.05）， nausea （RR=1.46， 95% CI： 0.55–3.86， P>0.05）， diarrhea （RR=0.71， 95% CI： 0.23–2.20， P>0.05）， and overall adverse reactions （RR=1.30， 95% CI： 0.79–2.15， P>0.05）. GRADE assessment rated the four indicators of dizziness and headache， diarrhea， overall incidence of adverse reactions， and EPDS score as "moderate-certainty evidence"， and rated the total effective rate， nausea， and the HAMD score as "low-certainty evidence". ConclusionrTMS demonstrates certain therapeutic efficacy for PPD， with a safety profile comparable to conventional treatment. ［Funded by Sichuan Psychological Society Research Planning Project （number， SCSXLXH202403099）； Guiding Science and Technology Plan Project of Guangyuan （number， 23ZDYF0095）］
