| Literature DB >> 32226407 |
Abstract
We aimed to investigate the non-linear features of the electroencephalogram (EEG) findings in patients with chronic microvascular ischemia (CMI) in order to determine the brain correlates of emotional impairment that could impact the risk of developing acute ischemia. We compared the EEG responses of patients with CMI and age-matched healthy volunteers to non-verbal emotionally charged sounds. We analyzed the EEG data, the psychological assessment of the stimuli, and the results of neuropsychological and behavioral testing. We assessed the (in)stability of the envelope's amplitude by calculating its average frequency and the ratio of its standard deviation to its mean. The non-linear features were lower in the patient group in the resting state. The emotional stimulation induced a decrease in the frequency of the envelope's amplitude in all subjects. Changes in the fractal dimension during stimulation were only seen in the patient group, and they correlated with symptoms of emotional lability. The lower ratio of the alpha-rhythm envelope's standard deviation to its mean in the right hemisphere correlated with a higher sense of threat. The EEG and behavioral correlates of emotional impairment in patients with CMI were found.Entities:
Keywords: EEG; Hjorth; chronic microvascular ischemia; emotional lability; envelope; fractal dimension
Year: 2020 PMID: 32226407 PMCID: PMC7080963 DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2020.00122
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurol ISSN: 1664-2295 Impact factor: 4.003
Descriptive statistics of subjects.
| Control group | 45 | 65.6 ± 7.1 | 13/22 | 7.9 ± 0.1 | 10.9 ± 2.5 | 8.5 ± 1.3 |
| CMI | 32 | 67.9 ± 5.1 | 17/15 | 5.2 ± 0.6 | 59.7 ± 6.8 | 8.3 ± 1.2 |
Mean ± SD.
Figure 1The visualization of Envelope's calculations: EMF—envelope mean frequency (1.6–30 Hz). EMFA—envelope mean frequency of the alpha-rhythm 8–13 Hz. RAT—ratio of its standard deviation to its mean (1.6–30 Hz). RATA—ratio of its standard deviation to its mean (8–13 Hz). EMF and EMFA reflect the frequency variability of the EEG data. RAT and RATA reflect the amplitude variability of the EEG data.
The results of neuropsychological testing.
| Patients | 65.8 ± 7.9 | 3.1 ± 0.7 | 2.2 ± 0.5 | 3.6 ± 0.9 | 1.9 ± 0.7 | 34.6 ± 12.1% |
| Control group | 39.1 ± 3.7 | 1.8 ± 0.5 | 4.6 ± 0.3 | 2.3 ± 0.6 | 4.1 ± 0.4 | 85.3 ± 9.4% |
Subjective assessment of stimuli.
| Control | Pleasantness | 4.7 ± 0.2 | −4.6 ± 0.9 | −4.7 ± 0.7 | −4.5 ± 0.3 | 4.1 ± 0.2 | −4.6 ± 0.3 | −4.5 ± 0.8 |
| Arousal | 3.9 ± 0.5 | 6.8 ± 0.8 | 6.5 ± 0.9 | 6.8 ± 0.5 | 5.4 ± 1.2 | 6.0 ± 0.4 | 6.6 ± 0.7 | |
| Empathy | 1.3 ± 0.4 | 8.3 ± 1.1 | 8.5 ± 0.8 | 7.7 ± 0.9 | 7.9 ± 1.4 | 2.1 ± 0.9 | 0.8 ± 0.2 | |
| Fear | 0.6 ± 0.1 | 3.2 ± 0.9 | 2.9 ± 1.1 | 3.1 ± 0.6 | 1.2 ± 0.4 | 6.8 ± 1.2 | 4.1 ± 1.1 | |
| Irritation | 1.0 ± 0.4 | 3.2 ± 0.6 | 2.9 ± 0.8 | 3.0 ± 0.7 | 2.3 ± 0.5 | 4.3 ± 1.1 | 4.0 ± 0.9 | |
| Anxiety | 2.1 ± 0.5 | 7.8 ± 1.0 | 7.6 ± 1.2 | 5.4 ± 0.8 | 4.2 ± 1.0 | 6.6 ± 1.2 | 3.8 ± 0.9 | |
| Suspiciousness | 2.3 ± 0.6 | 6.5 ± 1.0 | 6.3 ± 0.8 | 3.8 ± 0.8 | 5.1 ± 1.1 | 4.9 ± 1.2 | 4.8 ± 0.7 | |
| Sense of threat | 3.1 ± 0.6 | 6.8 ± 1.0 | 6.6 ± 0.7 | 1.9 ± 0.9 | 5.5 ± 1.0 | 6.1 ± 0.9 | 2.0 ± 0.7 | |
| CMI | Pleasantness | 6.9 ± 1.2 | −7.4 ± 1.2 | −7.8 ± 0.9 | −3.0 ± 0.3 | 3.7 ± 0.9 | −7.1 ± 1.1 | −2.9 ± 1.1 |
| Arousal | 1.1 ± 0.4 | 5.7 ± 0.9 | 5.1 ± 1.2 | 6.9 ± 0.9 | 3.6 ± 1.0 | 7.9 ± 0.7 | 4.7 ± 0.9 | |
| Empathy | 1.1 ± 0.6 | 3.9 ± 1.2 | 3.6 ± 0.9 | 3.0 ± 0.8 | 7.1 ± 0.7 | 1.1 ± 0.6 | 1.2 ± 0.6 | |
| Fear | 3.3 ± 0.7 | 3.0 ± 0.8 | 3.2 ± 1.3 | 2.2 ± 0.6 | 1.1 ± 0.6 | 6.8 ± 1.2 | 3.3 ± 1.0 | |
| Irritation | 5.0 ± 0.9 | 3.2 ± 1.6 | 3.0 ± 0.9 | 3.2 ± 0.9 | 2.9 ± 0.7 | 6.1 ± 1.1 | 3.4 ± 1.2 | |
| Anxiety | 2.3 ± 0.8 | 3.9 ± 1.0 | 4.1 ± 0.9 | 3.5 ± 0.8 | 2.0 ± 0.7 | 3.8 ± 0.9 | 2.1 ± 0.7 | |
| Suspiciousness | 1.8 ± 0.7 | 2.1 ± 0.8 | 2.0 ± 0.5 | 2.4 ± 0.8 | 1.5 ± 0.4 | 2.4 ± 0.7 | 1.8 ± 0.6 | |
| Sense of threat | 2.1 ± 0.8 | 2.8 ± 0.9 | 3.0 ± 0.7 | 3.2 ± 0.9 | 2.9 ± 0.7 | 3.2 ± 0.8 | 2.4 ± 0.5 |
Mean ± SD.
Figure 2Group differences between values of non-linear EEG data during rest. Significant group differences after Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons (p < 0.05) for each electrode are marked with a bold white dot.
Values of non-linear parameters (averaged by all electrodes) during rest and stimulation (mean ± SD).
| Patients with CMI | FD | 1.26 ± 0.07 | 1.23 ± 0.05 | 1.27 ± 0.08 | 1.24 ± 0.06 | |||
| EMF | 4.40 ± 1.62 | 3.40 ± 1.02 | 3.16 ± 0.82 | 4.49 ± 1.94 | 3.42 ± 1.14 | |||
| EMFA | 0.88 ± 0.11 | 0.66 ± 0.12 | 0.71 ± 0.15 | 0.67 ± 0.8 | 0.81 ± 1.16 | 0.61 ± 0.09 | 0.66 ± 0.09 | |
| RAT | 0.62 ± 0.09 | 0.62 ± 0.08 | 0.61 ± 0.09 | 0.59 ± 0.06 | 0.61 ± 0.09 | 0.61 ± 0.06 | 0.57 ± 0.09 | |
| RATA | 0.55 ± 0.08 | 0.56 ± 0.03 | 0.56 ± 0.06 | 0.55 ± 0.03 | 0.56 ± 0.04 | 0.56 ± 0.03 | 0.57 ± 0.05 | |
| Hjorth Complexity | 0.10 ± 0.03 | 0.09 ± 0.02 | 0.09 ± 0.02 | 0.09 ± 0.02 | 0.10 ± 0.03 | 0.09 ± 0.02 | 0.10 ± 0.03 | |
| Control group | FD | 1.46 ± 1.01 | 1.36 ± 0.14 | 1.35 ± 0.08 | 1.47 ± 1.01 | 1.47 ± 1.02 | 1.37 ± 0.09 | 1.45 ± 0.09 |
| EMF | 4.15 ± 1.89 | 4.38 ± 0.94 | 3.52 ± 1.19 | 4.41 ± 1.17 | 4.23 ± 2.05 | 4.99 ± 0.9 | 4.06 ± 1.39 | |
| EMFA | 0.58 ± 0.17 | 0.64 ± 0.19 | 0.54 ± 0.15 | 0.59 ± 0.13 | 0.57 ± 0.18 | 0.71 ± 0.12 | 0.57 ± 0.11 | |
| RAT | 0.58 ± 0.06 | 0.57 ± 0.04 | 0.56 ± 0.05 | 0.57 ± 0.05 | 0.57 ± 0.06 | 0.57 ± 0.07 | 0.57 ± 0.06 | |
| RATA | 0.65 ± 0.08 | 0.63 ± 0.07 | 0.64 ± 0.07 | 0.62 ± 0.07 | 0.63 ± 0.08 | |||
| Hjorth Complexity | 0.10 ± 0.04 | 0.11 ± 0.03 | 0.11 ± 0.03 | 0.10 ± 0.05 | 0.10 ± 0.04 | 0.11 ± 0.03 | 0.10 ± 0.04 |
Significant differences between stimuli and rest are marked by bold font.
Figure 3(A–C) Topographical plots showing the strength of Spearman correlation for all channels: (A) between Arousal rates and FD; (B) between Irritation rates and Hjorth complexity; (C) between rates of Sense of threat and RATA. Gray dots indicate channels with significant correlation (p < 0.05). Scatterplots of EEG patterns and ARSQ scores correspond to the channels marked as white dots. (D) RATA values in two groups of subjects during presentation of stimuli and rest (background condition).