| Literature DB >> 26762282 |
Genevieve Z Steiner1,2, Alan Yeung1, Jian-Xun Liu3, David A Camfield4,5, Frances M de Blasio2, Andrew Pipingas4, Andrew B Scholey4, Con Stough4, Dennis H Chang6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sailuotong (SLT) is a standardised herbal medicine formula consisting of Panax ginseng, Ginkgo biloba, and Crocus sativus, and has been designed to enhance cognitive and cardiovascular function.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26762282 PMCID: PMC4712609 DOI: 10.1186/s12906-016-0989-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Complement Altern Med ISSN: 1472-6882 Impact factor: 3.659
Fig. 1Flow chart of the study participants
Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics of participants
| Demographics | Mean ± Standard Deviation |
|---|---|
| Age (years) | 49.19 ± 14.28 |
| Height (cm) | 169.29 ± 9.35 |
| Weight (kg) | 70.50 ± 18.56 |
| MMSE | 29.50 ± 0.60 |
| Pulse (bpm) | 68.82 ± 14.27 |
| Blood Pressure Systolic (mmHg) | 118.71 ± 19.02 |
| Blood Pressure Diastolic (mmHg) | 76.29 ± 9.80 |
Mean difference and standard error between the SLT and placebo treatments for each Compass task
| Compass Task | Mean Difference ± Standard Error |
|---|---|
| Immediate Word Recall (number correct) | 0.19 ± 0.04 |
| Delayed Word Recall (number correct) | 0.69 ± -0.03 |
| Word Recognition (number correct) | -0.06 ± 0.24 |
| Picture Recognition (number correct) | -0.5 ± 0.23 |
| Face Recognition (number correct) | 0.31 ± -0.11 |
| Simple Reaction Time (ms) | 6.07 ± 7.54 |
| 2 Choice Reaction Time (accuracy %) | -0.88 ± 0.59 |
| 2 Choice Reaction Time (ms) | 21.36 ± 11.82 |
| 4 Choice Reaction Time (accuracy %) | 0.26 ± -0.18 |
| 4 Choice Reaction Time (ms) | -18.68 ± 0.68 |
| Numerical Working Memory (accuracy %) | 3.34 ± -1.12 |
| Numerical Working Memory (ms) | 90.09 ± 60.33 |
| Alphabetic Working Memory (accuracy %) | 0.13 ± -1.09 |
|
| - |
| Corsi Block Span (Span Length) | 0.25 ± -0.01 |
|
|
|
| Serial Subtract 3 (number correct) | 1.63 ± -0.82 |
| Serial Subtract 7 (number correct) | -0.94 ± -0.27 |
| Rapid Visual Information Processing (accuracy %) | -2.16 ± 0.13 |
| Rapid Visual Information Processing (ms) | 40.67 ± -16.79 |
| Mental Fatigue (End - Start) | -0.63 ± -2.32 |
| Alertness (End - Start) | 1.89 ± 0.40 |
Note: Tasks that are bolded had a treatment × time interaction that approached statistical significance (p < .10)
Fig. 2Grand mean ERPs for targets and nontargets from the midline sites for both visual (left) and auditory (right) modalities. The solid lines represent the raw data, and the dashed lines illustrate the reconstructed PCA waveforms. PCA extracted components are labelled at Fz for both modalities
Fig. 3Factor loadings for visual (top) and auditory (bottom) modalities. The topographic headmaps for each of the extracted ERP components are shown above the factor loadings (averaged across all subjects, treatments, and testing sessions), separately for each modality
Information for the factors identifiable as ERP components
| Visual | TF004 | TF006 | TF002 | TF003 | TF001 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Component | N1 | P2 | N2 | P3a | P3b |
| Latency (ms) | 168 | 208 | 252 | 352 | 420 |
| Maximal Site | P3 | O2 | P4 | P1 | C2 |
| Variance (%) | 3.8 | 2.5 | 16.6 | 16.3 | 45.8 |
| Sites Analysed | P3, P4 | Fz | C3, Cz, C4 | Fz, Cz, P3, Pz, P4 | Cz, Pz |
| Auditory | TF005 | TF004 | TF002 | TF003 | TF001 |
| Component | N1 | P2 | N2 | P3a | P3b |
| Latency (ms) | 132 | 210 | 264 | 348 | 412 |
| Maximal Site | F2 | Cz | Fz | Fz | Pz |
| Variance (%) | 4.7 | 6.6 | 10.9 | 8.3 | 57.4 |
| Sites Analysed | F3, Fz, F4, Cz | Fz, Cz | F3, Fz, F4, C3, Cz, C4 | F3, Fz, F4 | P3, Pz, P4 |
Note: Rows indicate component name, latency, site of maximal amplitude, percentage of total variance explained, and sites selected for analysis. TF = Temporal Factor
Mean difference and standard error between the SLT and placebo treatments for each EEG band and ERP component (all μV)
| Mean Difference ± Standard Error | ||
|---|---|---|
| EEG Spectral Band | Eyes Open | Eyes Closed |
| Delta | -1.64 ± -0.01 | -0.07 ± -0.73 |
| Theta | -0.82 ± -0.37 | 0.20 ± -0.32 |
| Alpha | -0.16 ± 0.44 | -3.66 ± -0.94 |
| Beta | 2.14 ± 0.82 | -0.65 ± -0.5 |
| Visual ERP Component | Target | Nontarget |
| N1 | -1.72 ± -0.06 | -0.45 ± -0.17 |
| P2 | -0.37 ± -0.08 | -0.69 ± 0.02 |
| N2 | -0.74 ± -0.06 | -0.05 ± -0.26 |
| P3a | 2.58 ± 0.02 | 1.98 ± -0.20 |
| P3b | -1.12 ± 0.10 | -1.38 ± -0.04 |
| Auditory ERP Component | Target | Nontarget |
|
|
| - |
| P2 | 1.16 ± 0.84 | -1.02 ± -0.31 |
| N2 | -0.14 ± 1.78 | -0.04 ± -0.13 |
|
|
| - |
| P3b | 0.58 ± -0.25 | -2.27 ± 0.10 |
Note: The bolded ERP components had a treatment × time × stimulus type interaction (p < .10)
Fig. 4Mean difference topographic headmaps for auditory N1 and P3a. Headmaps illustrate the difference in stimulus condition (target minus nontarget) and the difference between sessions (post-treatment minus baseline) for placebo and SLT. A SLT related reduction in N1 negativity, and an increase in P3a positivity are apparent
Mean difference and standard error between the SLT and placebo treatments for each of the three cardiovascular measures
| Mean Difference ± Standard Error | |
|---|---|
| Peripheral Pulse Pressure (mmHg) | -1.20 ± 0.52 |
| Aortic Pressure (mmHg) | -2.50 ± 0.19 |
| Resting HR (bpm) | 1.07 ± 1.55 |
Frequency of adverse events during treatment cycles and washout period
| During | During Placebo Cycle | During Washout | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tiredness | 3 | 2 | 3 |
| Headaches | 2 | 1 | 1 |
| Loose Stools | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Stomach Pain | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Back Pain | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Poor Sleep | 0 | 1 | 0 |