Marta Czapla1, Christian Baeuchl2, Joe J Simon3,4, Barbara Richter5, Matthias Kluge5, Hans-Christoph Friederich3,4, Karl Mann6, Sabine C Herpertz7, Sabine Loeber8. 1. Department of General Psychiatry, University of Heidelberg, Voßstraße 4, 69115, Heidelberg, Germany. Marta.Czapla@med.uni-heidelberg.de. 2. Department of Cognitive and Clinical Neuroscience, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany. 3. Department of General Internal and Psychosomatics, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. 4. Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Medical Faculty, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany. 5. Department for Addictive Disorders, Psychiatric Centre Nordbaden, Wiesloch, Germany. 6. Centre for Addictive Disorders, Central Institute of Mental Health, Mannheim, Germany. 7. Department of General Psychiatry, University of Heidelberg, Voßstraße 4, 69115, Heidelberg, Germany. 8. Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Otto-Friedrich-University of Bamberg, Bamberg, Germany.
Abstract
RATIONALE: Alcohol dependence is associated with impaired response inhibition and heightened cue reactivity towards alcohol-related stimuli. Several brain areas, but mainly prefrontal structures, have been linked to response inhibition in addiction. This study aimed at combining both aspects: salience of drug-associated cues and response inhibition using a go/no-go task with alcohol-associated stimuli during functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). OBJECTIVES: Nineteen abstinent alcohol-dependent patients (ADP) and 21 healthy control subjects (HC) were compared on blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD) responses during successful inhibition of no-go stimuli and successful reactions to go stimuli. RESULTS: ADP and HC did not significantly differ in their behavioural performance in the task. However, both groups performed worse during the inhibition of alcoholic-associated stimuli compared to neutral stimuli. On the neural level, ADP displayed enhanced BOLD activity relative to HC during successful response inhibition in several areas involved in visual processing, cognitive and impulse control, including occipital structures, anterior cingulate gyrus, medial frontal gyrus and medial orbitofrontal cortex. CONCLUSIONS: We interpret these findings as a possible compensation strategy for impaired cognitive processing. Furthermore, the results underline the impact of salience of alcohol-related stimuli on response inhibition, which seems to affect both ADP and HC.
RATIONALE: Alcohol dependence is associated with impaired response inhibition and heightened cue reactivity towards alcohol-related stimuli. Several brain areas, but mainly prefrontal structures, have been linked to response inhibition in addiction. This study aimed at combining both aspects: salience of drug-associated cues and response inhibition using a go/no-go task with alcohol-associated stimuli during functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). OBJECTIVES: Nineteen abstinent alcohol-dependent patients (ADP) and 21 healthy control subjects (HC) were compared on blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD) responses during successful inhibition of no-go stimuli and successful reactions to go stimuli. RESULTS:ADP and HC did not significantly differ in their behavioural performance in the task. However, both groups performed worse during the inhibition of alcoholic-associated stimuli compared to neutral stimuli. On the neural level, ADP displayed enhanced BOLD activity relative to HC during successful response inhibition in several areas involved in visual processing, cognitive and impulse control, including occipital structures, anterior cingulate gyrus, medial frontal gyrus and medial orbitofrontal cortex. CONCLUSIONS: We interpret these findings as a possible compensation strategy for impaired cognitive processing. Furthermore, the results underline the impact of salience of alcohol-related stimuli on response inhibition, which seems to affect both ADP and HC.
Authors: Stewart H Mostofsky; Joanna G B Schafer; Michael T Abrams; Melissa C Goldberg; Abigail A Flower; Avery Boyce; Susan M Courtney; Vince D Calhoun; Michael A Kraut; Martha B Denckla; James J Pekar Journal: Brain Res Cogn Brain Res Date: 2003-07
Authors: Derik Hermann; Michael N Smolka; Sabine Klein; Andreas Heinz; Karl Mann; Dieter F Braus Journal: Addict Biol Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 4.280
Authors: Jodie Naim-Feil; Paul B Fitzgerald; John L Bradshaw; Dan I Lubman; Dianne Sheppard Journal: Arch Clin Neuropsychol Date: 2013-12-13 Impact factor: 2.813
Authors: Danielle M Dick; Gregory Smith; Peter Olausson; Suzanne H Mitchell; Robert F Leeman; Stephanie S O'Malley; Kenneth Sher Journal: Addict Biol Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 4.280
Authors: Liangsuo Ma; Joel L Steinberg; Kathryn A Cunningham; Scott D Lane; James M Bjork; Harshini Neelakantan; Amanda E Price; Ponnada A Narayana; Thomas R Kosten; Antoine Bechara; F Gerard Moeller Journal: Neuroimage Clin Date: 2015-03-24 Impact factor: 4.881
Authors: Alexander Weigard; Mary Soules; Bailey Ferris; Robert A Zucker; Chandra Sripada; Mary Heitzeg Journal: Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging Date: 2019-12-10
Authors: Matthias Grieder; Leila M Soravia; Raphaela M Tschuemperlin; Hallie M Batschelet; Andrea Federspiel; Simon Schwab; Yosuke Morishima; Franz Moggi; Maria Stein Journal: Front Psychiatry Date: 2022-07-01 Impact factor: 5.435
Authors: Laura Murray; Julia C Welsh; Chase G Johnson; Roselinde H Kaiser; Todd J Farchione; Amy C Janes Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2022-04-15 Impact factor: 4.852
Authors: Sean M Molnar; Lauren E Beaton; Joseph P Happer; Lee A Holcomb; Siyuan Huang; Donatello Arienzo; Ksenija Marinkovic Journal: Brain Sci Date: 2018-01-04
Authors: Samuel Suárez-Suárez; Sonia Doallo; Jose Manuel Pérez-García; Montserrat Corral; Socorro Rodríguez Holguín; Fernando Cadaveira Journal: Front Psychiatry Date: 2020-06-09 Impact factor: 4.157