| Literature DB >> 32038311 |
Thomas Reijnders1, Thierry Troosters2,3, Wim Janssens3,4, Rik Gosselink2, Daniel Langer2, Paul W Davenport5, Andreas von Leupoldt1.
Abstract
We compared the perception and neural processing of respiratory sensations between 20 COPD patients and 20 healthy controls by means of respiratory-related evoked potentials (RREP) in the electroencephalogram (EEG). RREPs were induced by short inspiratory occlusions while 129-channel EEG was measured. COPD patients rated the occlusions as more intense and unpleasant (p's < 0.001) and showed higher mean amplitudes for the RREP components P1 (p = 0.0004), N1 (p = 0.024), P2 (p = 0.019), and P3 (p = 0.018). Our results indicate that COPD patients demonstrate greater perception and neural processing of respiratory sensations, which presumably reflects the highly aversive and attention-demanding character of these sensations for COPD patients.Entities:
Keywords: brain; chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; dyspnea; electro encephalogram; respiratory related evoked potential
Year: 2020 PMID: 32038311 PMCID: PMC6992658 DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2020.00007
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Physiol ISSN: 1664-042X Impact factor: 4.566
Overview.
| Age (years) | 63.4 (10.1) | 67.7 (7.3) | ns |
| Sex (female/male) | (8/12) | (8/12) | ns |
| FEV1 (% predicted) | 51 (23) | 102 (13) | <0.001 |
| FVC (% predicted) | 88 (28) | 105 (11) | 0.013 |
| FEV1/FVC (%) | 48 (18) | 78 (5) | <0.001 |
| Never smokers | 1 | 7 | |
| Ex-smokers | 16 | 13 | |
| Current smokers | 3 | 0 | |
| VT (mL) | 757 (247) | 784 (239) | ns |
| V’ (L/s) | 0.4 (0.1) | 0.4 (0.1) | ns |
| PIma quiet breathing (cmH2O) | −1.1(0.3) | −1.0(0.3) | ns |
| PIma occlusions (cmH2O) | −5.7(2.9) | −3.3(1.3) | 0.002 |
| F (breaths/min) | 16 (3) | 15 (4) | ns |
| TI (s) | 1.9 (0.4) | 2.2 (0.5) | 0.032 |
| Number of occlusions averaged | 19 (4) | 20 (5) | ns |
| Occlusion intensity (0–10) | 3.5 (1.1) | 2.0 (0.5) | <0.001 |
| Occlusion unpleasantness (0–10) | 3.7 (1.5) | 2.1 (0.7) | <0.001 |
| Nf | −1.65(1.86) | −1.07(1.07) | ns |
| P1 | 2.76 (1.69) | 1.04 (1.07) | <0.001 |
| N1 | −4.15(3.01) | −2.32(1.69) | 0.024 |
| P2 | 2.61 (2.48) | 0.86 (2.01) | 0.019 |
| P3 | 4.05 (3.02) | 2.19 (1.32) | 0.018 |
| Anxiety (HADS-A) | 7.6 (3.1) | ||
| Health status (CRDQ) | 71.6 (10.9) | ||
| Symptom burden (mMRC) | 2.2 (0.7) |
FIGURE 1(A) Mean (±SD) ratings of occlusion intensity and unpleasantness for COPD patients and control subjects. (B) Averaged waveforms (μV) of the respiratory-related evoked potential for COPD patients and control subjects from sensors at frontal (Nf), centro-lateral (N1 & P2), and centro-parietal (P1 & P3) scalp positions. Based on previous reports (von Leupoldt et al., 2011), RREP components were identified as: Nf, negative peak – frontal region (latency: 25–50 ms); P1, positive peak – centro-parietal region (latency: 45–65 ms); N1, negative peak – centro-lateral region (latency: 85–125 ms); P2, positive peak – central region (latency: 160–230 ms); P3, positive peak – centro-parietal region (latency: 250–350 ms). RREP components and respective topographical areas are indicated on the figure. (C) Mean (±SD) amplitudes (μV) for RREP components Nf, P1, N1, P2, and P3 for COPD patients and control subjects. Mean amplitudes were calculated around each individual peak using a latency window of ±10 ms for Nf and P1, and ±20 ms for N1, P2, and P3. (D) Correlations between mean P3 amplitudes (μV) and Borg scale ratings of intensity and unpleasantness for COPD patients. ∗p < 0.05; ∗∗∗p < 0.001.