The prevalence of severe mental disorders has been rising annually. Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is considered a valuable treatment option in psychiatry for conditions such as schizophrenia and medication-resistant depression, especially when other treatments have proven insufficient. ECT rapidly improves patients\' mood, alleviates symptoms, and demonstrates significant therapeutic effects. Currently, the form of ECT used in clinical practice is modified electroconvulsive therapy (mECT), which is administered under general anesthesia. Accumulative evidence has confirmed that different anesthetic drugs, anesthetic-ECT time interval, anesthetic depth, and airway management can impact the outcomes of ECT. Therefore, this review aims to summarize the current impact of anesthesia factors on ECT, providing reference for clinical anesthesia during ECT procedures.

Ketamine has been repeatedly demonstrated to be an effective treatment in the management of patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD). An important question is whether it is equally or more effective than the current gold standard of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), as the adverse effects of ECT can lead to memory loss and neurocognitive deficits. A literature search was conducted for trials that directly compared the efficacy and adverse effects of ketamine and ECT via PubMed and Google Scholar. A total of 56 articles were identified with six included in this review. The studies included differed significantly in their quality and with differing levels of potential for bias. Ketamine has a more immediate effect when compared to ECT, but the antidepressant effects are shorter-lasting. Cognitive deficits were less pronounced in patients undergoing ketamine therapy. Many studies had a small number of participants and varied widely in the type of ECT used. Allocation bias seems likely in nonrandomized studies. Follow-up times were also short in some studies. The existing literature does not provide sufficient evidence to support the usage of ketamine over that of ECT for TRD, as remission rates were significantly higher over extended periods in ECT groups. Cognitive adverse effects were more pronounced in patients undergoing ECT. More high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) directly comparing these two treatment modalities are required before drawing any firm conclusions.

OBJECTIVE: Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is one of the most studied and validated available treatments for severe or treatment-resistant depression. However, little is known about the neural mechanisms underlying ECT. This systematic review aims to critically review all structural magnetic resonance imaging studies investigating longitudinal cortical thickness (CT) changes after ECT in patients with unipolar or bipolar depression.
METHODS: We performed a search on PubMed, Medline, and Embase to identify all available studies published before April 20, 2023. A total of 10 studies were included.
RESULTS: The investigations showed widespread increases in CT after ECT in depressed patients, involving mainly the temporal, insular, and frontal regions. In five studies, CT increases in a non-overlapping set of brain areas correlated with the clinical efficacy of ECT. The small sample size, heterogeneity in terms of populations, comorbidities, and ECT protocols, and the lack of a control group in some investigations limit the generalisability of the results.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the idea that ECT can increase CT in patients with unipolar and bipolar depression. It remains unclear whether these changes are related to the clinical response. Future larger studies with longer follow-up are warranted to thoroughly address the potential role of CT as a biomarker of clinical response after ECT.

To assess electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) outcomes in patients affected by depressive symptoms with versus without additional comorbid personality disorders/traits.
We identified observational studies investigating ECT clinical outcomes in patients affected by depressive symptoms with versus without comorbid personality disorders/traits in Embase/Medline in 11/2022. Our protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023390833). Study quality was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa-Scale. Our primary outcomes were ECT response and remission rates. Meta-regression analyses included effects of in/outpatient percentages, age, number of ECT sessions, and electrode placement; subgroup analyses included the assessment methods for personality disorders/traits. We performed sensitivity analyses after excluding poor-quality studies.
A total of 20 studies (n = 11,390) were included in our analysis. Patients with comorbid personality disorders/traits had lower remission rates (OR = 0.42, 95% CI = 0.31, 0.58, p < 0.001) with substantial heterogeneity (I2  = 93.0%) as well as lower response rates (OR = 0.35, 95% CI = 0.24, 0.51, n = 5129, p < 0.001) with substantial heterogeneity (I2  = 93.0%) compared with patients without comorbid personality disorders/traits. Relapse rates were higher in patients with versus without comorbid personality disorders/traits (OR = 3.23, 95% CI = 1.40, 7.45, k = 4, n = 239, p = 0.006) with moderate heterogeneity (I2  = 75.0%) and post-ECT memory impairment was more frequent in patients with versus without comorbid personality disorders/traits (OR = 1.41, 95% CI = 1.36, 1.46, k = 4, n = 471, p < 0.001) with minimal heterogeneity (I2  = 0.0%). Dropout rates were higher in patients with versus without comorbid personality disorders/traits (OR = 1.58, 95% CI = 1.13, 2.21, k = 3, n = 6145, p = 0.008).
Patients with comorbid personality disorders/traits treated with ECT are reported to have lower response and remission rates and higher rates of side effects and relapse rates compared with patients without personality disorders/traits.

BACKGROUND: Electrolyte disturbances related to sodium and potassium affect patients with mental disorders undergoing electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). The objective of this study was to systematically summarize the data regarding ECT and electrolyte disturbances related to sodium and potassium.
METHODS: A systematic literature review in accordance with PRISMA guidelines was conducted. Clinical studies of patients receiving ECT with electrolyte disturbances reported before or after treatment were included.
RESULTS: We identified nine case reports and two retrospective studies describing electrolyte abnormalities occurring before or after ECT. ECT was effective and safe in patients with hyponatremia and hypernatremia, including the elderly patient population. This treatment was also effective in treating psychiatric symptoms that may persist after ionic equalization. Electrolyte disturbances after ECT were rare. Reports have suggested that succinylcholine used as a muscle relaxant was the main cause of hyperkalemia after ECT.
CONCLUSIONS: Electrolyte control is a crucial aspect of guiding ECT therapy. In the context of sodium-related disorders, it is critical to control patient hydration as part of therapy. In addition, succinylcholine should not be used in patients with immobilization, such as catatonia or neuroleptic malignant syndrome. It is necessary to conduct further studies to clarify whether electrolyte concentration affects ECT parameters and clinical efficacy. In addition, it is necessary to assess the influence of various anesthetics on these conditions during ECT. The result of this review should be interpreted bearing in mind the small number of studies conducted to date and the low quality of the evidence they provide.

BACKGROUND: The potential benefits of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) in chronic pain and several theories for its mechanism have been reported in the past, but mixed findings have also been reported. In the current systematic review and case series, our primary aim was to assess whether pain and functional outcomes are improved after ECT in patients with chronic pain. Secondary objectives included examining whether psychiatric improvement, specific pain diagnoses, and demographic or medical characteristics were associated with differences in pain treatment response.
METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review to identify patients with chronic pain diagnoses for more than 3 months prior to the initiation of ECT and a systematic literature search on electronic databases for studies on chronic pain outcomes after ECT.
RESULTS: Eleven patients with various chronic pain diagnoses and comorbid psychiatric conditions were identified in the case series. Six patients reported improvement in pain while 10 patients reported improvement in mood following ECT. Systematic review identified 22 articles reporting a total of 109 cases. Eighty-five (78%) of cases reported reduction in pain while 96.3% of the patients with a comorbid psychiatric diagnosis reported improvement in mood symptoms post-ECT. While there was an association between improvement in mood and pain in studies with numeric ratings in both outcomes (r = 0.61; p < 0.001), some patients reported pain improvement without improvement in mood in both the case series and the pooled analysis of cases in the review. Certain pain diagnoses such as CRPS, phantom limb pain, neuropathic pain, and low back pain have consistently reported benefits and should be further studied in future studies with matched case controls.
CONCLUSIONS: ECT may be offered to patients with certain pain conditions who have not responded sufficiently to conventional therapies, particularly when comorbid mood symptoms are present. Improved documentation practices on the outcomes in chronic pain patients receiving ECT will help generate more studies that are needed on this topic.

ECT has been proposed as a potential treatment for PTSD. There is a small number of clinical studies to date, but no quantitative review of the efficacy has been conducted. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of ECT in reducing PTSD symptoms. We followed the PICO and the PRISMA guidelines and searched PubMed, MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (PROSPERO No: CRD42022356780). A random effects model meta-analysis was conducted with the pooled standard mean difference, applying Hedge\'s adjustment for small sample sizes. Five within-subject studies met the inclusion criteria, containing 110 patients with PTSD symptoms receiving ECT (mean age 44.13 ± 15.35; 43.4% female). ECT had a small but significant pooled effect on reducing PTSD symptoms (Hedges\' g = -0.374), reducing intrusion (Hedges\' g = -0.330), avoidance (Hedges\' g = -0.215) and hyperarousal (Hedges\' g = -0.171) symptoms. Limitations include the small number of studies and subjects and the heterogeneity of study designs. These results provide preliminary quantitative support for the use of ECT in the treatment of PTSD.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to systematically review the literature on using electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) in patients with dementia/major NCD (Neuro cognitive disorder) presenting with behavioral symptoms.
METHODS: We conducted a PRISMA-guided systematic review of the literature. We searched five major databases, including PubMed, Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and registry (ClinicalTrials.gov), collaborating with \"ECT\" and \"dementia/major NCD\" as our search terms.
METHODS: Out of 445 published papers and four clinical trials, only 43 papers and three clinical trials met the criteria. There were 22 case reports, 14 case series, 4 retrospective chart reviews, 1 retrospective case-control study, 1 randomized controlled trial, and 2 ongoing trials. We evaluated existing evidence for using ECT in dementia/major NCD patients with depressive symptoms, agitation and aggression, psychotic symptoms, catatonia, Lewy body dementia/major NCD, manic symptoms, and a combination of these symptoms.
METHODS: The studies were conducted in the in-patient setting.
METHODS: Seven hundred and ninety total patients over the age of 60 years were added.
RESULTS: All reviewed studies reported symptomatic benefits in treating behavioral symptoms in individuals with dementia/major NCD. While transient confusion, short-term memory loss, and cognitive impairment were common side effects, most studies found no serious side effects from ECT use.
CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence from a systematic review of 46 studies indicates that ECT benefits specific individuals with dementia/major NCD and behavioral symptoms, but sometimes adverse events may limit its use in these vulnerable individuals.

UNASSIGNED: Postictal agitation (PIA) after electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is a serious clinical problem estimated to occur in 7-36% of patients and recur in 19-54% of patients. PIA has the potential to cause dangerous situations for the patient and staff members aside from the financial impact. To date, it is unclear which pharmacological interventions should be used in the management of PIA. This study aimed to systematically review the (preventative) pharmacological treatment options for PIA after ECT.
UNASSIGNED: A systematic search was done in PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and Web of Science from inception until 10 November 2022. We included randomized trials with any pharmacological intervention or comparison and a predefined outcome measure on PIA. Studies that solely included patients with neurodegenerative disorders or stroke were excluded. Data quality was assessed with the RoB2 and GRADE. Meta-analysis was performed if possible. This study was registered on PROSPERO under CRD42021262323.
UNASSIGNED: We screened 2,204 articles and included 14 studies. Dexmedetomidine was investigated in 10 studies. Alfentanil, lignocaine, esmolol, midazolam, propofol, ketamine, haloperidol, and diazepam were each studied in only one study. Meta-analysis revealed an OR of 0.45 (0.32-0.63), a moderate effect size, in favor of dexmedetomidine than placebo to prevent PIA with very low heterogeneity (I2 = 0%). The certainty of the evidence was moderate. The other interventions studied were all found to have low certainty of evidence.
UNASSIGNED: For clinical practice, we believe that our results indicate that dexmedetomidine should be considered for the prevention of PIA in patients that have previously experienced PIA.

ECT is considered the fastest and most effective treatment for TRD. Ketamine seems to be an attractive alternative due to its rapid-onset antidepressant effects and impact on suicidal thoughts. This study aimed to compare efficacy and tolerability of ECT and ketamine for different depression outcomes (PROSPERO/CRD42022349220).
We searched MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase, PsycINFO, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library and trial registries, which were the ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization\'s International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, without restrictions on publication date.
randomized controlled trials or cohorts comparing ketamine versus ECT in patients with TRD.
Eight studies met the inclusion criteria (of 2875 retrieved). Random-effects models comparing ketamine and ECT regarding the following outcomes were conducted: a) reduction of depressive symptoms severity through scales, g = -0.12, p = 0.68; b) response to therapy, RR = 0.89, p = 0.51; c) reported side-effects: dissociative symptoms, RR = 5.41, p = 0.06; nausea, RR = 0.73, p = 0.47; muscle pain, RR = 0.25, p = 0.02; and headache, RR = 0.39, p = 0.08. Influential & subgroup analyses were performed.
Methodological issues with high risk of bias in some of the source material, reduced number of eligible studies with high in-between heterogeneity and small sample sizes.
Our study showed no evidence to support the superiority of ketamine over ECT for severity of depressive symptoms and response to therapy. Regarding side effects, there was a statistically significant decreased risk of muscle pain in patients treated with ketamine compared to ECT.