| Literature DB >> 35493804 |
Peter Stanwell1, Grant L Iverson2,3,4,5,6, Ryan Van Patten2,3,7,8, Rudolph J Castellani9, Paul McCrory10, Andrew J Gardner11,12.
Abstract
Objective: A cavum septum pellucidum (CSP) has been reported as a visible brain anomaly in normal individuals as well in some former combat and collision sport athletes. The appearance of CSP with fenestrations and ventricular enlargement are considered associated features of the neuropathological diagnosis of chronic traumatic encephalopathy. The current study examined CSP anatomic features and lateral ventricle size in retired elite rugby league players and controls.Entities:
Keywords: biomarkers; cavum septum pellucidum; cognition; concussion; magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); rugby; traumatic brain injury
Year: 2022 PMID: 35493804 PMCID: PMC9044485 DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2022.817709
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurol ISSN: 1664-2295 Impact factor: 4.086
Figure 1Images of grades of CSP. Cavum septum pellucidum (CSP) grading system for grades encountered in this study. Top: White box depicts region that was enlarged to undertake CSP grading for each participant. Bottom: from left to right the four-image panel represents CSP grades of 0 (absent), 1 (slight), 2 (mild), and 3 (moderate). There were no grade 4 (severe) cases in this study.
Group comparisons on CSP and ventricle size.
|
| |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |||||||||||
| Length of CSP | 6.88 | 5.00 | 7.42 | 2.00–9.50 | 3.61 | 2.00 | 8.62 | 0.00–3.50 |
|
|
|
| Septal length | 5.37 | 5.46 | 0.50 | 5.06–5.72 | 5.25 | 5.26 | 0.46 | 4.92–5.57 | 986.00 | 0.18 | 0.15 |
| CSP/septal ratio | 1.29 | 1.02 | 1.35 | 0.35–1.78 | 0.68 | 0.43 | 1.51 | 0.00–0.65 |
|
|
|
| Evans' ratio | 0.27 | 0.27 | 0.02 | 0.25–0.29 | 0.27 | 0.27 | 0.02 | 0.25–0.28 | 901.00 | 0.58 | 0.06 |
|
| |||||||||||
| Length of CSP | 6.76 | 5.00 | 7.10 | 2.00–10.00 | 4.05 | 3.00 | 8.65 | 0.00–4.00 |
|
|
|
| Septal length | 5.14 | 5.29 | 0.61 | 4.71–5.65 | 5.02 | 5.01 | 0.54 | 4.66–5.37 | 941.00 | 0.35 | 0.10 |
| CSP/septal ratio | 1.32 | 1.01 | 1.35 | 0.39–1.96 | 0.79 | 0.50 | 1.49 | 0.00–0.85 |
|
|
|
| Evans' ratio | 0.26 | 0.27 | 0.03 | 0.24–0.28 | 0.26 | 0.26 | 0.02 | 0.24–0.28 | 884.00 | 0.69 | 0.04 |
The length of the CSP and the CSP/Septal Ratios are redundant variables; their Spearman correlations are r = 0.991 (Rater 1) in the control participants and r = 0.995 (Rater 1) in the retired players. Only the CSP/Septal Ratio should be interpreted. In the text, we refer to this significant difference between CSP/Septal Ratio as revealing a “larger” CSP in the retired players.
CSP, cavum septum pellucidum; IQR, interquartile range; Md, median; M, mean; SD, standard deviation; U, Mann Whitney U statistic; p, probability of a Type I error; r, correlation coefficient. Effect sizes are interpreted as 0.1 = small, 0.3 = moderate, 0.5 = large.
Clinical measures and concussion exposure variables in retired Rugby League players only (n = 41).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 50.60 | 47.00 | 15.20 | 39.50–59.50 | 52.19 | 51.50 | 12.34 | 41.50–62.25 | 181.00 | 0.63 | −0.08 |
| Number of self-reported concussions | 43.24 | 20.00 | 45.47 | 7.00–80.50 | 28.69 | 17.00 | 39.13 | 5.25–31.75 | 235.50 | 0.35 | 0.15 |
| Age of first exposure to rugby league | 8.28 | 6.00 | 4.21 | 5.50–10.00 | 7.56 | 7.00 | 3.52 | 4.25–9.75 | 213.50 | 0.72 | 0.06 |
| Years played professionally | 8.24 | 9.00 | 4.68 | 3.00–12.00 | 8.88 | 10.50 | 6.05 | 2.25–13.00 | 193.00 | 0.86 | −0.03 |
| Lifetime exposure to rugby league (Years) | 23.56 | 25.00 | 5.61 | 20.50–28.00 | 25.06 | 26.00 | 6.09 | 22.25–28.50 | 174.50 | 0.50 | −0.11 |
| Perceived cognitive decline (IQCODE-self) | 3.22 | 3.19 | 0.45 | 2.94–3.50 | 3.22 | 3.19 | 0.47 | 3.00–3.46 | 123.50 | 0.73 | −0.06 |
| Depression (DASS) | 5.60 | 4.00 | 8.29 | 0.00–10.00 | 8.25 | 7.00 | 7.04 | 0.50–15.50 | 143.50 | 0.13 | −0.23 |
| Daytime sleepiness (ESS) | 6.04 | 4.00 | 5.05 | 2.50–11.00 | 4.63 | 4.00 | 3.93 | 1.25–8.25 | 225.00 | 0.52 | 0.11 |
| Impulsivity (BIS) | 62.48 | 61.00 | 14.23 | 50.00–74.00 | 64.63 | 62.50 | 9.93 | 57.25–75.50 | 164.00 | 0.58 | 0.09 |
| Estimated intelligence (ToPF reading) | 102.16 | 102.00 | 11.10 | 95.00–111.50 | 100.94 | 101.00 | 8.98 | 93.25–107.75 | 215.00 | 0.70 | 0.06 |
| Cognitive composite | 48.80 | 49.33 | 6.16 | 44.67–52.79 | 47.09 | 47.25 | 3.55 | 44.52–50.25 | 252.50 | 0.16 | 0.22 |
| RAVLT learning | 40.44 | 42.00 | 10.31 | 34.50–48.50 | 41.88 | 42.00 | 8.57 | 35.00–45.75 | 191.50 | 0.82 | 0.04 |
| RCFT immediate recall | 43.60 | 45.00 | 9.31 | 37.50–50.00 | 38.63 | 37.50 | 7.61 | 33.25–43.50 | 271.50 | 0.06 | 0.30 |
| RCFT delayed recall | 44.24 | 45.00 | 8.42 | 39.50–50.50 | 40.25 | 39.00 | 7.67 | 35.25–45.75 | 265.50 | 0.08 | 0.27 |
| Trails A | 47.44 | 47.00 | 10.27 | 40.50–56.50 | 46.00 | 44.00 | 8.20 | 41.25–52.75 | 218.00 | 0.64 | 0.08 |
| Trails B | 56.40 | 58.00 | 12.18 | 52.00–64.50 | 54.13 | 56.50 | 8.43 | 46.00–60.50 | 241.00 | 0.28 | 0.17 |
| Stroop inhibition | 52.76 | 53.00 | 13.90 | 39.50–62.00 | 49.63 | 49.50 | 11.00 | 41.75–54.50 | 234.50 | 0.36 | 0.14 |
| Phonemic fluency (COWAT FAS) | 46.88 | 45.00 | 13.53 | 41.00–52.50 | 48.81 | 48.50 | 10.08 | 40.00–54.00 | 184.50 | 0.68 | −0.06 |
| Semantic fluency (animals) | 56.80 | 59.00 | 13.96 | 46.00–67.00 | 50.38 | 53.00 | 10.42 | 41.75–59.75 | 258.50 | 0.12 | 0.24 |
| WAIS-IV digit span backwards | 47.92 | 47.00 | 8.74 | 41.50–53.00 | 46.50 | 47.00 | 5.51 | 43.00–50.00 | 205.00 | 0.91 | 0.02 |
| WAIS-IV digit span sequencing | 50.16 | 50.00 | 9.09 | 45.00–57.00 | 50.50 | 51.50 | 8.35 | 41.75–57.00 | 201.50 | 0.97 | 0.01 |
| WAIS-IV coding | 50.04 | 53.00 | 9.02 | 43.00–55.00 | 49.38 | 50.00 | 7.22 | 47.00–53.00 | 231.00 | 0.42 | 0.13 |
| WAIS-IV symbol search | 48.92 | 53.00 | 10.21 | 40.00–57.00 | 49.06 | 50.00 | 8.25 | 43.00–53.00 | 211.00 | 0.78 | 0.05 |
CSP, Cavum Septum Pellucidum; IQR, Interquartile Range; Md, Median; M, Mean; SD, Standard Deviation; U, Mann Whitney U statistic; BIS, Barrett Impulsivity Scale; COWAT, Controlled Oral Word Association Test; DASS, Depression, Anxiety, Stress Scales; ESS, Epworth Sleepiness Scale; IQCODE-Self, Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly, self-report form; RAVLT, Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test; RCFT, Rey Complex Figure Test; ToPF, Test of Premorbid Functioning Reading Standard Score; WAIS-IV, Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-4th Edition.
For Perceived Cognitive Decline, data were missing for two six participants with Abnormal CSP (n = 19) and for two participants with Normal CSP group (n = 14).
For Impulsivity, data were missing for two participants with Abnormal CSP, leading to a group size of 23 (total sample size = 39) for that variable. Effect sizes are interpreted as 0.1 = small, 0.3 = moderate, 0.5 = large.
Spearman bivariate clinical-anatomic correlations in retired Rugby League players (n = 41).
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|
| Age | ||
| Number of self-reported concussions | ||
| Age of first exposure to Rugby League | ||
| Years played professionally | ||
| Lifetime exposure to rugby league (years) | ||
| Perceived cognitive decline (IQCODE-self) | ||
| Depression (DASS) | ||
| Daytime sleepiness (ESS) | ||
| Impulsivity (BIS) | ||
| Estimated intelligence (ToPF reading) | ||
| Cognitive composite | ||
| RAVLT learning | ||
| RCFT immediate recall | ||
| RCFT delayed recall | ||
| Trails A | ||
| Trails B | ||
| Stroop inhibition | ||
| Phonemic fluency (COWAT FAS) | ||
| Semantic fluency (animals) | ||
| WAIS-IV digit span backwards | ||
| WAIS-IV digit span sequencing | ||
| WAIS-IV coding | ||
| WAIS-IV symbol search |
CSP, Cavum Septum Pellucidum; COWAT, Controlled Oral Word Association Test; DASS, Depression, Anxiety, Stress Scales; ESS, Epworth Sleepiness Scale; IQCODE-Self, Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly, self-report form; RAVLT, Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test; RCFT, Rey Complex Figure Test; ToPF, Test of Premorbid Functioning Reading Standard Score; WAIS-IV, Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-4th Edition.
For Perceived Cognitive Decline, data were missing for eight participants, leading to a total sample size of 33 for these correlations.
For Impulsivity, data were missing for two participants, leading to a total sample size of 39 for these correlations.
CSP in people with mental disorder and healthy control subjects, visible on MRI.
|
|
|
|
| |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Degreef et al. ( | 22 | 62 | 35.5 | 7 | 46 | 15.2 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Jurjus et al. ( | 23 | 127 | 18.1 | 7 | 37 | 18.9 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| DeLisi et al. ( | 38 | 85 | 44.7 | 14 | 47 | 29.8 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Myslobodsky et al. ( | 5 | 10 | 50.0 | 0 | 10 | 0.0 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Shioiri et al. ( | 12 | 153 | 7.8 | 1 | 92 | 1.1 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Nopoulos et al. ( | 32 | 55 | 58.2 | 44 | 75 | 58.7 | 6 | 55 | 10.9 | 1 | 75 | 1.3 |
| Fukuzako and Kodama ( | 34 | 72 | 47.2 | 16 | 41 | 39.0 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Kwon et al. ( | 49 | 67 | 73.1 | 39 | 46 | 84.8 | 12 | 67 | 17.9 | 4 | 46 | 8.7 |
| Rajarethinam et al. ( | 44 | 73 | 60.3 | 18 | 43 | 41.9 | 3 | 73 | 4.1 | 1 | 43 | 2.3 |
| Keshavan et al. ( | 4 | 40 | 10.0 | 7 | 59 | 11.9 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Galarza et al. ( | 14 | 32 | 43.8 | 2 | 19 | 10.5 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Crippa et al. ( | 16 | 21 | 76.2 | 18 | 21 | 85.7 | 0 | 21 | 0.0 | 0 | 21 | 0.0 |
| Kasai et al. ( | 56 | 74 | 75.7 | 49 | 56 | 87.5 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| de Souza Crippa et al. ( | 30 | 38 | 78.9 | 33 | 38 | 86.8 | 8 | 38 | 21.1 | 1 | 38 | 2.6 |
| Borgwardt et al. ( | 1 | 30 | 3.3 | 0 | 26 | 0.0 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Kim et al. ( | 28 | 41 | 68.3 | 21 | 41 | 51.2 | 8 | 41 | 19.5 | 1 | 41 | 2.4 |
| Flashman et al. ( | 53 | 77 | 68.8 | 42 | 55 | 76.4 | 11 | 77 | 14.3 | 5 | 55 | 9.1 |
| Takahashi et al. ( | 157 | 201 | 78.1 | 133 | 163 | 81.6 | 15 | 201 | 7.5 | 12 | 163 | 7.4 |
| Takahashi et al. ( | 223 | 251 | 88.8 | 78 | 87 | 89.7 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Takahashi et al. ( | 48 | 56 | 85.7 | 28 | 33 | 84.8 | 3 | 56 | 5.4 | 5 | 33 | 15.2 |
| Chon et al. ( | 43 | 71 | 60.6 | 21 | 71 | 29.6 | 5 | 71 | 7.0 | 3 | 71 | 4.2 |
| Takahashi et al. ( | 22 | 26 | 84.6 | 18 | 24 | 75.0 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Hwang et al. ( | 54 | 65 | 83.1 | 43 | 67 | 64.2 | 12 | 65 | 18.5 | 4 | 67 | 6.0 |
| Toivonen et al. ( | – | – | – | – | – | – | 2 | 26 | 7.7 | 2 | 25 | 8.0 |
| Landin-Romero et al. ( | 314 | 639 | 49.1 | 71 | 223 | 31.8 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Totals | 1,322 | 2,366 | 55.9% | 710 | 1,420 | 50.0% | 85 | 791 | 10.7% | 39 | 678 | 5.8% |
The sample sizes for each study were derived from .