Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 27, 2026
Neuroimaging-Guided TMS–EEG for Real-Time Cortical Network Mapping
Published on: June 13, 2025
Systematic review and meta-analysis of bifrontal electroconvulsive therapy versus bilateral and unilateral
Ross A Dunne1, Declan M McLoughlin
1Department of Psychiatry, Trinity College Dublin, St. Patrick's University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland. ross.dunne@tcd.ie
Objectives:
Our aim was to perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing efficacy and side effects of bifrontal (BF) ECT to bitemporal (BT) or unilateral (RUL) ECT in depression.
Methods:
We performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials comparing BF ECT with RUL or BT ECT in depression. Eight trials (n=617) reported some cognitive outcome. Efficacy was measured by reduction in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale score. Cognitive outcomes were limited to Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) in seven studies, with two studies measuring each of: Complex-figure delayed recall, Trail-making tests and verbal learning.
Results:
Efficacy was equal between BF and BT ECT (Hedges's g=0.102, P=0.345, confidence interval (CI): -0.110, 0.313) and BF and RUL ECT (standardized mean difference=-0.12, P=0.365, CI: -0.378, 0.139). Post-treatment MMSE score decline was less for BF than BT ECT (g=0.89, CI: 0.054, 1.724) but not RUL ECT. RUL ECT impaired Complex figure recall more than BF ECT (g=0.76, CI :0.487, 1.035), but BF ECT impaired word recall more than RUL ECT (g=-1.45, CI: -2.75, -0.15).
Conclusions:
Bifrontal ECT is not more effective than BT or RUL ECT but may have modest short-term benefits for specific memory domains. BF ECT has potential advantages, but given longer experience with BT and RUL, bifrontal ECT requires better characterization.
