ArticleThe journal of ECT2025
Computational Models of High-Definition Electroconvulsive Therapy for Focal or Multitargeting Treatment.
Article in The journal of ECT, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Electroconvulsive therapy generates a postictal wave of spreading depolarization in mice and humans.Nature communications · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
abstractAttempts to dissociate electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) therapeutic efficacy from cognitive side effects of ECT include modifying electrode placement, but traditional electrode placements employing 2 large electrodes are inherently nonfocal, limiting the ability to selectively engage targets associated with clinical benefit while avoiding nontargets associated with adverse side effects. Limited focality represents a technical limitation of conventional ECT, and there is growing evidence that the spatial distribution of the ECT electric fields induced in the brain drives efficacy and side effects. Computational models can be used to predict brain current flow patterns for existing and novel ECT montages. Using finite element method simulations (under quasi-static, nonadaptive assumptions, 800-mA total current), the electric fields generated in the superficial cortex and subcortical structures were predicted for the following traditional ECT montages (bilateral temporal, bifrontal, right unilateral) and experimental montages (focal electrically administered seizure therapy, lateralized high-definition [HD]-ECT, unilateral 4 × 1-ring HD-ECT, bilateral 4 × 1-ring HD-ECT, and a multipolar HD-ECT). Peak brain current density in regions of interest was quantified. Conventional montages (bilateral bifrontal, right unilateral) each produce distinct but diffuse and deep current flow. Focal electrically administered seizure therapy and lateralized HD-ECT produce unique, lateralized current flow, also impacting specific deep regions. A 4 × 1-ring HD-ECT restricts current flow to 1 (unilateral) or 2 (bilateral) cortical regions. Multipolar HD-ECT shows optimization to a specific target set. Future clinical trials are needed to determine whether enhanced control over current distribution is achieved with these experimental montages, and the resultant seizures, improve the risk/benefit ratio of ECT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.