| Literature DB >> 26091104 |
James H Cole1, Maria Laura Filippetti2, Matthew P G Allin2, Muriel Walshe2, Kie Woo Nam2, Boris A Gutman3, Robin M Murray2, Larry Rifkin2, Paul M Thompson3, Chiara Nosarti2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The hippocampus has been reported to be structurally and functionally altered as a sequel of very preterm birth (<33 weeks gestation), possibly due its vulnerability to hypoxic-ischemic damage in the neonatal period. We examined hippocampal volumes and subregional morphology in very preterm born individuals in mid- and late adolescence and their association with psychiatric outcome.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26091104 PMCID: PMC4474892 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0130094
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Demographic, cognitive, behavioural data and raw hippocampal volumes in mm3 for preterm adolescents and controls at baseline and follow-up.
| Baseline (age 15 years) | Follow-up (age 19 years) | Test statistics | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Preterm (n = 61) | Control (n = 35) | Preterm (n = 61) | Control (n = 35) | ||
|
| 15.46 0.45 | 14.99 0.73 | 19.61 0.86 | 18.97 0.82 | Baseline t = 4.94 Follow-up t = 5.55 |
|
| 32/29 | 18/16 | 32/29 | 18/16 | Baseline X2 = 0.03 Follow-up X2 = 0.01 |
|
| 99.24 15.70 | 108.15 12.10 | 96.58 13.68 | 102.83 12.49 | Group F = 4.23 Time F = 3.42 Group |
|
| 97.86 14.93 | 105.94 10.12 | 93.97 15.82 | 99.86 12.50 | Group F = 4.26 Time F = 5.63 Group |
|
| 100.6 18.02 | 108.54 15.24 | 99.45 15.06 | 103.43 15.68 | Group F = 1.38 Time F = 1.41 Group |
|
| 6.97 7.58 | 8.00 6.32 | - | - | Baseline t = 0.65 |
|
| 5.16 4.65 | 5.34 3.80 | 7.41 7.35 | 7.18 6.37 | Group F = 0.047 Time F = 2.08 Group |
|
| 27.9% | 22.9% | 34.4% | 42.9% | Baseline X2 = 0.26 Follow-up X2 = 0.67 |
|
| - | - | 1.17 2.20 | 1.23 2.29 | Follow-up t = -0.12 |
|
| - | - | 6.6% | 5.7% | Follow-up X2 = 0.03 |
|
| 2389.7 427.7 | 2409.5 435.5 | 2595.7 403.0 | 2582.5 396.6 | Group F = 2.23 Time F = 10.54 Group |
|
| 2199.7 364.8 | 2311.6 338.6 | 2415.9 449.5 | 2397.3 374.1 | Group F = 2.81 Time F = 8.96 Group |
Values reported in mean (standard deviation) format. PDI = Peters Delusions Inventory.
* VPT participants were older than controls at both baseline and follow-up assessments (p < 0.001) from t-tests
1 Significant group effect (VPT individuals vs. controls) (p < 0.05) from repeated measures ANOVA
2 Significant effect of time (baseline vs. follow-up) (p < 0.05) from repeated measures ANOVA
3 Significant interaction between group (VPT individuals and controls) and time (baseline vs. follow-up) (p < 0.05) from repeated measures ANOVA.
At baseline (age 15 years) PDI data were missing for 18 VPT born participants; at follow-up (age 19 years), for 7 VPT born participants and one control.
Fig 1Shape analysis showing cross-sectional and longitudinal surface deformations in preterm adolescents compared to controls.
P-values denote statistical significance of control > preterm across 2000 surface vertices, corrected for multiple tests (50,000 permutations). (A) Baseline comparison, superior view, with left hippocampus on the right. (B) Baseline comparison, inferior view with the left hippocampus on the left. (C) Follow-up comparison, superior view, with left hippocampus on the right. (D) Follow-up comparison, inferior view with the left hippocampus on the left. (E) Longitudinal surface deformations preterm adolescents, superior view, with left hippocampus on the right. (F) Longitudinal surface deformations in preterm adolescents, inferior view with the left hippocampus on the left. (G) Longitudinal surface deformations in the control group, superior view, with left hippocampus on the right. (H) Longitudinal surface deformations in the control group, inferior view with the left hippocampus on the left. (I) Superior view of representative hippocampal shapes with approximate subfields labelled. CA1 = blue, CA2-3 = green, subiculum = mauve. (J) Corresponding inferior view with subfields labelled.
Cross-sectional hippocampal shape analysis details
| Contrast | Number of vertices with p < 0.05 | Percentage hippocampal difference | Anatomical location |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 562 | 28.10% | Subiculum, CA1, CA2, CA3 |
|
| 568 | 28.40% | Subiculum, CA1, CA2, CA3 |
|
| 423 | 21.15% | Subiculum, CA1 |
|
| 468 | 23.40% | Subiculum, CA1 |
Based on 2000 vertices per hippocampus.
Longitudinal hippocampal shape analysis details.
| Contrast | Number of vertices with p < 0.05 | Percentage hippocampal difference | Anatomical location |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 213 | 10.65% | Subiculum, CA1 |
|
| 218 | 10.90% | Subiculum, CA1 |
|
| 517 | 25.85% | CA1, CA2, CA3 |
|
| 317 | 15.85% | CA2, CA3 |
Based on 2000 vertices per hippocampus.
Results of linear regression analyses with behavioural scores as dependent variables and cross-sectional and longitudinal normalised hippocampal volume (all participants).
| Predictors (Behavioural and clinical measures) | Outcome variables | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline hippocampal volume | Follow-up hippocampal volume | Longitudinal change in hippocampal volume | |||||
| Left | Right | Left | Right | Left | Right | ||
|
|
| β = 0.0; t = 1.09; p = 1.00 | β = 0.0; t = 1.62; p = 0.44 | β = 0.0; t = 1.13; p = 0.67 | β = 0.0; t = 1.21; p = 0.89 | β = -0.023; t = -0.19; p = 1.00 | β = -0.027; t = 0.13; p = 1.00 |
|
| β = -0.023; t = -1.32; p = 0.95 | β = -0.023; t = -1.62; p = 0.44 | β = -0.02; t = -1.23; p = 0.67 | β = -0.022; t = -1.23; p = 0.89 | β = 8.23; t = 0.36; p = 1.00 | β = 4.54; t = 24.25; p = 1.00 | |
|
|
| β = -0.08; t = -0.55; p = 0.95 | β = 0.10; t = 0.83; p = 0.451 | β = 0.05; t = 0.58; p = 0.57 | β = 0.13; t = 1.34; p = 0.44 | β = 37.55; t = 0.29; p = 0.77 | β = 63.07; t = 0.46; p = 0.65 |
|
| β = 0.043; t = 0.53; p = 1.00 | β = -0.034; t = -0.52; p = 0.602 | β = -0.047; t = -0.62; p = 0.67 | β = -0.077; t = -0.95; p = 0.89 | β = -93.90; t = -0.89; p = 1.00 | β = -26.42; t = 110.86; p = 1.00 | |
|
|
| β = 0.083; t = 1.09; p = 1.00 | β = 0.17; t = 2.81; p = 0.032 | β = 0.13; t = 1.90; p = 0.31 | β = 0.085; t = 1.14; p = 0.89 | β = 90.28; t = 0.92; p = 1.00 | β = -111.96; t = 103.18; p = 1.00 |
|
| β = -0.067; t = -0.25; p = 1.00 | β = 0.28; t = 1.31; p = 0.44 | β = 0.35; t = 1.45; p = 0.61 | β = 0.47; t = 1.79; p = 0.39 | β = 488.21; t = 1.42; p = 1.00 | β = 154.02; t = 360.32; p = 1.00 | |
|
|
| 2.02 | 2.25 | 2.05 | 1.97 | -109.00 | 181.98 |
|
| 0.28 | 0.23 | 0.25 | 0.27 | 359.30 | 377.30 | |
|
| 0.04 | 0.18 | 0.10 | 0.09 | 0.05 | 0.02 | |
|
| 0.73 | 0.048 | 0.20 | 0.25 | 0.59 | 0.93 | |
Behavioural variables (PDI, Rutter scale, GHQ-12) were all log10 transformed prior to statistical analysis. Results are derived from multiple linear regression analysis and are reported in this form: β-coefficient; t-value; FDR adjusted p-value for each coefficient.
* Denotes statistically significant result after FDR correction [73] for multiple testing.
Fig 2The relationship between baseline right hippocampal volume and PDI score at follow-up.
The plotted values are based on the normalised right hippocampal volume at baseline and the log10 transformed total PDI score at follow-up. This relationship was the sole significant association between imaging and behavioural measures in the analysis, after FDR correction for multiple testing (p = 0.032). R2 (ratio of the sum of squares explained by the regression model and the total sum of squares around the mean) of right hippocampus at age 15 years: VPT = 0.11, controls = 0.12. The horizontal grey line represents the cut-off in terms of PDI ‘caseness’, defined at follow-up using PDI ≥ 8, which after log10 conversion = 0.9031. Plotted points that lie on the grey are defined as PDI cases.
Fig 3Longitudinal shape analysis showing surface deformations in ‘PDI-cases’ compared to ‘PDI-non-cases’.
P-values denote statistical significance of follow-up > baseline across 2000 surface vertices, corrected for multiple tests (50,000 permutations). (A) Superior view, with right hippocampus on the left. (B) Inferior view, with right hippocampus on the right.