This study did not yield definitive evidence of short-term efficacy for adjunctive VNS in treatment-resistant depression.

These 1-year open trial data found VNS to be well tolerated, suggesting a potential long-term, growing benefit in treatment-resistant depression, albeit in the context of changes in depression treatments. Comparative long-term data are needed to determine whether these benefits can be attributed to VNS.

Currently available therapeutic interventions for treatment-resistant depression, including switch, combination, and augmentation strategies, are less than ideal. Observations of mood elevation during vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) therapy for pharmacoresistant epilepsy suggested a role for VNS therapy in refractory major depression and prompted clinical investigation of this neurostimulation modality. The VNS Therapy System has been available for treatment of pharmacoresistant epilepsy since 1997 and was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for treatment-resistant depression in July, 2005. The physiology of the vagus nerve, mechanics of the VNS Therapy System, and efficacy and safety in pharmacoresistant epilepsy are reviewed. Promising results of VNS therapy for treatment-resistant depression have been forthcoming from both acute and long-term studies, evidenced in part by progressive improvements in depression rating scale scores during the 1st year of treatment with maintenance of response thereafter. VNS therapy is well tolerated in patients with either pharmacoresistant epilepsy or treatment-resistant depression. As in epilepsy, the mechanisms of VNS therapy of treatment-resistant depression are incompletely understood. However, evidence from neuroimaging and other studies suggests that VNS therapy acts via innervation of the nucleus tractus solitarius, with secondary projections to limbic and cortical structures that are involved in mood regulation, including brainstem regions that contain serotonergic (raphe nucleus) and noradrenergic (locus ceruleus) perikarya that project to the forebrain. Mechanisms that mediate the beneficial effects of VNS therapy for treatment-resistant depression remain obscure. Suggestions for future research directions are described.

The relationship between pretreatment regional cerebral glucose metabolism and eventual antidepressant drug response was measured using positron emission tomography (PET) in hospitalized patients with unipolar depression. Rostral anterior cingulate metabolism uniquely differentiated eventual treatment responders from non-responders. Hypometabolism characterized non-responders when compared with controls, in contrast to responders who were hypermetabolic. Metabolism in no other region discriminated the two groups, nor did associated demographic, clinical or behavioral measures, including motor speed, cognitive performance, depression severity or illness chronicity. Cingulate hypermetabolism may represent an important adaptive response to depression and failure of this response may underlie poor outcome. A critical role for rostral cingulate area 24a/b in the limbic-cortical network involved in abnormal mood states is proposed.

The 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD 17 ) and the Montgomery Äsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) are two widely used clinicianrated symptom scales. A 6-item version of the HRSD (HRSD 6 ) was created by Bech to address the psychometric limitations of the HRSD 17 . The psychometric properties of these measures were compared using classical test theory (CTT) and item response theory (IRT) methods. IRT methods were used to equate total scores on any two scales. Data from two distinctly different outpatient studies of nonpsychotic major depression: a 12-month study of highly treatment-resistant patients (n=233) and an 8-week acute phase drug treatment trial (n=985) were used for robustness of results.MADRS and HRSD 6 items generally contributed more to the measurement of depression than HRSD 17 items as shown by higher item-total correlations and higher IRT slope parameters. The MADRS and HRSD 6 were unifactorial while the HRSD 17 contained 2 factors. The MADRS showed about twice the precision in estimating depression as either the HRSD 17 or HRSD 6 for average severity of depression. An HRSD 17 of 7 corresponded to an 8 or 9 on the MADRS and 4 on the HRSD 6 .The MADRS would be superior to the HRSD 17 in the conduct of clinical trials.