Gabriele Pezzullo
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Gabriele Pezzullo has a total of 6 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Alberto Priori
Department of Health Sciences, University of Milan, 20142 Milan, Italy
1 shared publication - Beatrice Benatti
University of Milan, Department of Mental Health, Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences Luigi Sacco, Milan, Italy; "Aldo Ravelli" Center for Neurotechnology and Brain Therapeutic, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
1 shared publication - Bernardo Dell’osso
Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services, ASST Fatebenefratelli-Sacco, Milan, Italy
1 shared publication - Kevin La Monica
Department of Psychiatry, Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences “Luigi Sacco”, University of Milan, ASST Fatebenefratelli-Sacco, 20157 Milan, Italy
1 shared publication - Matteo Vismara
Department of Psychiatry, Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences “Luigi Sacco”, University of Milan, ASST Fatebenefratelli-Sacco, 20157 Milan, Italy
1 shared publication - Tiziano Prodi
Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services, ASST Fatebenefratelli-Sacco, Milan, Italy
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 22 September 2024
- Published by MDPI AG in Brain Sciences
- Vol. 14 (9) , 949
Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for the Treatment of Depression in a Real-World Setting: Findings from a Cohort Study
Background/Objectives: In the past two decades, significant advancements in neuromodulation techniques have occurred, such as transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) for treatment-resistant depression (TRD). According to the assumption that repeated stimulation within a condensed timeframe can yield sustained efficacy, an accelerated protocol may be more effective in reducing time to response. With those premises, this study aimed to evaluate a sample of TRD patients treated with standard repetitive TMS (rTMS) and accelerated rTMS (arTMS). Methods: Nine subjects were treated with standard rTMS and 19 with arTMS. Psychometric assessment was made at the baseline and one week, one month, and three months after the treatment. A linear mixed-effect regression was performed along with other appropriate statistical analyses. Results: A significant improvement over time was observed for both depressive and cognitive symptoms. Moreover, considering the reduction in the Montgomery–Asberg Depression Rating Scale scores, a better treatment response was observed in subjects treated with arTMS (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Our findings showed a significant difference between the two protocols in terms of clinical response. Although further studies are needed to confirm the superiority of arTMS, the better cost-effectiveness of this technique should be considered.
- 22 September 2024
- Published by MDPI AG in Brain Sciences
- Vol. 14 (9) , 949
Open AccessRepetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for the Treatment of Depression in a Real-World Setting: Findings from a Cohort Study
Background/Objectives: In the past two decades, significant advancements in neuromodulation techniques have occurred, such as transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) for treatment-resistant depression (TRD). According to the assumption that repeated stimulation within a condensed timeframe can yield sustained efficacy, an accelerated protocol may be more effective in reducing time to response. With those premises, this study aimed to evaluate a sample of TRD patients treated with standard repetitive TMS (rTMS) and accelerated rTMS (arTMS). Methods: Nine subjects were treated with standard rTMS and 19 with arTMS. Psychometric assessment was made at the baseline and one week, one month, and three months after the treatment. A linear mixed-effect regression was performed along with other appropriate statistical analyses. Results: A significant improvement over time was observed for both depressive and cognitive symptoms. Moreover, considering the reduction in the Montgomery–Asberg Depression Rating Scale scores, a better treatment response was observed in subjects treated with arTMS (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Our findings showed a significant difference between the two protocols in terms of clinical response. Although further studies are needed to confirm the superiority of arTMS, the better cost-effectiveness of this technique should be considered.