| Literature DB >> 28555167 |
Hugo P Aben1,2, Yael D Reijmer2, Johanna M A Visser-Meily3, Jacoba M Spikman4, Geert Jan Biessels2, Paul L M de Kort1, Procras Study Group1,2,3,4.
Abstract
Impaired recognition of emotion after stroke can have important implications for social competency, social participation, and consequently quality of life. We describe a case of left hemispheric ischemic stroke with impaired recognition of specifically faces expressing fear. Three months later, the patient's spouse reports that the patient was irritable and slow in communication, which may be caused by the impaired emotion recognition. The case is discussed in relation to the literature concerning emotion recognition and its neural correlates. Our case supports the notion that emotion recognition, including fear recognition, is regulated by a network of interconnected brain regions located in both hemispheres. We conclude that impaired emotion recognition is not uncommon after stroke and can be caused by dysfunction of this emotion-network.Entities:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28555167 PMCID: PMC5438834 DOI: 10.1155/2017/1045039
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Case Rep Neurol Med ISSN: 2090-6676
The patient's results for the “Ekman 60 Faces Test.”
| Emotion | Nr correct answers | Mean scores reference sample (SD) | Cutoff values |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anger | 8/10 | 7.33 (1.90) | 4 |
| Disgust | 6/10 | 9.00 (1.62) | 6 |
| Fear | 1/10 | 6.47 (2.03) | 3 |
| Happiness | 10/10 | 9.93 (0.42) | 9 |
| Sadness | 5/10 | 8.03 (1.66) | 5 |
| Surprise | 5/10 | 8.66 (1.44) | 6 |
|
| |||
| Total | 35/60 | 49.41 (4.88) | 41 |
The mean scores, standard deviations. and cutoff values for the reference sample (aged 61–70) are derived from the FEEST manual. This sample consisted of 58 healthy participants with an IQ > 90. Cutoff values have been calculated by using the nearest integer value to a z-value of 1.65 below average [12]. Scores below the cutoff value.
Neuropsychological assessment of the patient.
| Domain |
| Tests |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Attention and processing speed | 46.6 | Reaction Time Test, Vienna Test System, S1, S2 | 50.5 |
| Symbol Digit Modalities Test | 44.2 | ||
| Trail Making Test A | 41.0 | ||
|
| |||
| (Working) memory and learning | 39.2 | WAIS Digit Span Forward and Backward | 41.7 |
| The Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test | 38.0 | ||
|
| |||
| Frontal-Executive functions | 39.8 | Controlled Oral Word Association Test | 30.0 |
| Hayling Test | 40.0 | ||
| Reaction time test, Vienna Test System, S3 | 47.0 | ||
| Trail Making Test B | 44.0 | ||
|
| |||
| Language | 31.6 | Boston Naming Test | 23.1 |
| Semantic fluency | 40.0 | ||
|
| |||
| Visuospatial function | NA | Bells Test, no | NA |
This table shows the T-scores of the patient for each of the tested domains in the neuropsychological assessment. Scores below 1.5 standard deviations.
Figure 1Transversal fluid attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) images of the patient, revealing a lesion to the posterior part of the insula and part of the left temporal cortex and left parietal cortex.
Figure 2Axial (a) and lateral (b) view of the disconnectivity profile of the patient (obtained from analyzing the DTI-MRI data). Nodes represent 90 cortical and subcortical brain regions [38]. The red nodes indicate regions with more than 1.5 standard deviations of decreased connectivity strength compared to 25 age-matched healthy controls. Note that nodes surrounding the ischemic zone are affected. In addition, however, nodes in the contralesional hemisphere and a frontal node are affected. This suggests that the stroke affected a network of brain regions.