Despite the abundance of literature on treatment-resistant depression (TRD), there is no universally accepted definition of TRD, and available treatment pathways for the management of TRD vary across the Latin American region, highlighting the need for a uniform definition and treatment principles to optimize the management of TRD in Latin America.
METHODS: Following a thematic literature review and pre-meeting survey, a Latin America expert panel comprising 14 psychiatrists with clinical experience in managing patients with TRD convened and utilized the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method to develop consensus-based recommendations on the appropriate definition of TRD and principles for its management.
RESULTS: The expert panel agreed that \'treatment-resistant depression\' (TRD) is defined as \'failure of two drug treatments of adequate doses, for 4-8 weeks duration with adequate adherence, during a major depressive episode\'. A stepwise treatment approach should be employed for the management of TRD - treatment strategies can include maximizing dose, switching to a different class, and augmenting or combining treatments. Nonpharmacological treatments, such as electroconvulsive therapy, are also appropriate options for patients with TRD.
CONCLUSIONS: These consensus recommendations on the operational definition of TRD and approved treatments for its management can be adapted to local contexts in the Latin American countries but should not replace clinical judgement. Individual circumstances and benefit-risk balance should be carefully considered while determining the most appropriate treatment option for patients with TRD.

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) is defined by the European Medicines Agency as a lack of clinically meaningful improvement after treatment, with at least two different antidepressants. Individual, familiar, and socio-economic burden of TRD is huge. Given the lack of clear guidelines, the large variability of TRD approaches across different countries and the availability of new medications to meet the need of effective and rapid acting therapeutic strategies, it is important to understand the consensus regarding the clinical characteristics and treatment pathways of patients with TRD in Italian routine clinical practice, particularly in view of the recent availability of esketamine nasal spray.
METHODS: A Delphi questionnaire with 17 statements (with a 7 points Likert scale for agreement) was administered via a customized web-based platform to Italian psychiatrists with at least 5 years of experience and specific expertise in the field of depression. In the second-round physicians were asked to answer the same statements considering the interquartile range of each question as an index of their colleagues\' responses. Stata 16.1 software was used for the analyses.
RESULTS: Sixty panellists, representative of the Italian territory, answered the questionnaire at the first round. For 8/17 statements more than 75% of panellists reached agreement and a high consensus as they assigned similar scores; for 4 statements the panellists assigned similar scores but in the middle of the Likert scale showing a moderate agreement with the statement, while for 5 statements there was indecision in the agreement and low consensus with the statement.
CONCLUSIONS: This Delphi Panel showed that there is a wide heterogeneity in Italy in the management of TRD patients, and a compelling need of standardised strategies and treatments specifically approved for TRD. A high level of consensus and agreement was obtained about the importance of adding lithium and/or antipsychotics as augmentation therapies and in the meantime about the need for long-term maintenance therapy. A high level of consensus and agreement was equally reached for the identification of esketamine nasal spray as the best option for TRD patients and for the possibility to administrate without difficulties esketamine in a community outpatient setting, highlighting the benefit of an appropriate educational support for patients.

UNASSIGNED: Difficult-to-treat-depression (DTD) is a clinical challenge. The interventions that are well-established for DTD are not suitable or effective for all the patients. Therefore, more treatment options are highly warranted. We formulated an evidence-based guideline concerning six interventions not well-established for DTD in Denmark.
UNASSIGNED: Selected review questions were formulated according to the PICO principle with specific definitions of the patient population (P), the intervention (I), the comparison (C), and the outcomes of interest (O), and systematic literature searches were performed stepwise for each review question to identify relevant systematic reviews/meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. Clinical recommendations were formulated based on the evidence, the risk-benefit ratio, and perceived patient preferences.
UNASSIGNED: We found sufficient evidence for a weak recommendation of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and cognitive behavioural analysis system of psychotherapy (CBASP). The use of bright light therapy in DTD was not sufficiently supported by the evidence, but should be considered as good clinical practice. The interventions should be considered in addition to ongoing antidepressant treatment. We did not find sufficient evidence to recommend intravenous ketamine/esketamine, rumination-focused psychotherapy, or cognitive remediation to patients with DTD.
UNASSIGNED: The evidence supported two of the six reviewed interventions, however it was generally weak which emphasizes the need for more good quality studies. This guideline does not cover all treatment options and should be regarded as a supplement to relevant DTD-guidelines.

Many depressed patients are not able to achieve or sustain symptom remission despite serial treatment trials - often termed \"treatment resistant depression\". A broader, perhaps more empathic concept of \"difficult-to-treat depression\" (DTD) was considered.
A consensus group discussed the definition, clinical recognition, assessment and management implications of the DTD heuristic.
The group proposed that DTD be defined as \"depression that continues to cause significant burden despite usual treatment efforts\". All depression management should include a thorough initial assessment. When DTD is recognized, a regular reassessment that employs a multi-dimensional framework to identify addressable barriers to successful treatment (including patient-, illness- and treatment-related factors) is advised, along with specific recommendations for addressing these factors. The emphasis of treatment, in the first instance, shifts from a goal of remission to optimal symptom control, daily psychosocial functional and quality of life, based on a patient-centred approach with shared decision-making to enhance the timely consideration of all treatment options (including pharmacotherapy, psychotherapy, neurostimulation, etc.) to optimize outcomes when sustained remission is elusive.
The recommended definition and management of DTD is based largely on expert consensus. While DTD would seem to have clinical utility, its specificity and objectivity may be insufficient to define clinical populations for regulatory trial purposes, though DTD could define populations for service provision or phase 4 trials.
DTD provides a clinically useful conceptualization that implies a search for and remediation of specific patient-, illness- and treatment obstacles to optimizing outcomes of relevance to patients.