| Literature DB >> 36032254 |
Miseon Shim1,2, Han-Jeong Hwang2,3, Seung-Hwan Lee4,5.
Abstract
Impaired cognitive function related to intrusive memories of traumatic experiences is the most noticeable characteristic of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD); nevertheless, the brain mechanism involved in the cognitive processing is still elusive. To improve the understanding of the neuropathology in PTSD patients, we investigated functional cortical networks that are based on graph theory, by using electroencephalogram (EEG). EEG signals, elicited by an auditory oddball paradigm, were recorded from 53 PTSD patients and 39 healthy controls (HCs). Source signals in 68 regions of interests were estimated using EEG data for each subject using minimum-norm estimation. Then, using source signals of each subject, time-frequency analysis was conducted, and a functional connectivity matrix was constructed using the imaginary part of coherence, which was used to evaluate three global-level (strength, clustering coefficient, and path length) and two nodal-level (strength and clustering coefficients) network indices in four frequency bands (theta, alpha, low-beta, and high-beta). The relationships between the network indices and symptoms were evaluated using Pearson's correlation. Compared with HCs, PTSD patients showed significantly reduced spectral powers around P300 periods and significantly altered network indices (diminished strength and clustering coefficient, and prolonged path length) in theta frequency band. In addition, the nodal strengths and nodal clustering coefficients in theta band of PTSD patients were significantly reduced, compared with those of HCs, and the reduced nodal clustering coefficients in parieto-temporo-occipital regions had negative correlations with the symptom scores (Impact of Event Scale-Revises, Beck Depression Inventory, and Beck Anxiety Inventory). The characterization of this disrupted pattern improves the understanding of the neuropathophysiology underlying the impaired cognitive function in PTSD patients.Entities:
Keywords: cognitive function; electroencephalogram; functional cortical networks; post-traumatic stress disorder (PSTD); theta frequency band
Year: 2022 PMID: 36032254 PMCID: PMC9403077 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.811766
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychiatry ISSN: 1664-0640 Impact factor: 5.435
Demographic data of the post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) patients and healthy controls (HCs).
| PTSD | HCs | ||
| Cases (N) | 53 | 39 | |
| Gender (male/female) | 24/29 | 18/21 | 0.521 |
| Age (years) | 42.86 ± 10.49 | 38.74 ± 9.05 | 0.777 |
| Education (years) | 13.27 ± 3.13 | 14.47 ± 2.15 | 0.413 |
| IES-R | 53.21 ± 20.80 | ||
| BDI | 26.58 ± 12.62 | 9.30 ± 5.13 | 0.001 |
| BAI | 29.86 ± 15.71 | 5.13 ± 4.21 | 0.001 |
The p-values represent significant differences between the two groups.
The p-values were obtained using the independent t-test for age and education, and the chi-squared test for gender.
BDI, back’s depression inventory; BAI, back’s anxiety inventory.
**p < 0.001.
FIGURE 1Averaged total power patterns of four lobes [frontal (A), parietal (B), temporal (C), and occipital lobes (D)] across all subjects and region of interests (ROIs) included in each lobe for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) patients and healthy controls (HCs), respectively, and the total power differences between PTSD patients and HCs.
FIGURE 2Comparison of the global-level network indices (strength, clustering coefficient, and path length) in all frequency bands for each positive and negative network between the post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) patients and healthy controls (HCs). PTSD, post-traumatic stress disorder; HCs, healthy controls. *p < 0.01.
All statistic results of global-level network indices for positive network between two groups.
| PTSD | HCs | DF | Effect size | |||
|
| ||||||
| Strength | 15.98 ± 7.57 | 20.30 ± 8.33 | 0.009 | –2.56 | 77.35 | 0.55 |
| Clustering coefficient | 0.21 ± 0.09 | 0.26 ± 0.11 | 0.008 | –2.55 | 76.23 | 0.55 |
| Path length | 2.75 ± 0.81 | 2.27 ± 0.65 | 0.003 | 3.15 | 89.30 | 0.64 |
|
| ||||||
| Strength | 11.85 ± 6.62 | 14.51 ± 6.13 | 0.051 | –1.98 | 85.27 | 0.41 |
| Clustering coefficient | 0.17 ± 0.08 | 0.20 ± 0.07 | 0.088 | –1.72 | 87.24 | 0.36 |
| Path length | 3.29 ± 1.10 | 2.86 ± 0.87 | 0.038 | 2.11 | 89.44 | 0.42 |
|
| ||||||
| Strength | 6.93 ± 2.89 | 7.11 ± 2.61 | 0.753 | –0.32 | 86.33 | 0.07 |
| Clustering coefficient | 0.09 ± 0.04 | 0.09 ± 0.03 | 0.891 | –0.14 | 86.84 | 0.02 |
| Path length | 5.49 ± 1.49 | 5.28 ± 1.39 | 0.490 | 0.69 | 85.10 | 0.15 |
|
| ||||||
| Strength | 6.67 ± 2.40 | 6.23 ± 1.91 | 0.327 | 0.99 | 89.37 | 0.20 |
| Clustering coefficient | 0.09 ± 0.03 | 0.08 ± 0.02 | 0.214 | 1.25 | 89.99 | 0.25 |
| Path length | 5.57 ± 1.49 | 5.75 ± 1.08 | 0.517 | –0.65 | 89.98 | 0.13 |
*p < 0.01.
DF, degree of freedom.
All statistic results of global-level network indices for negative network between two groups.
| PTSD | HCs | DF | Effect size | |||
|
| ||||||
| Strength | 9.04 ± 4.42 | 7.19 ± 2.93 | 0.019 | 2.41 | 89.14 | 0.48 |
| Clustering coefficient | 0.13 ± 0.06 | 0.11 ± 0.04 | 0.065 | 1.89 | 89.97 | 0.38 |
| Path length | 4.06 ± 1.28 | 4.61 ± 1.39 | 0.055 | –1.95 | 78.24 | 0.42 |
|
| ||||||
| Strength | 16.38 ± 8.93 | 12.74 ± 3.02 | 0.075 | 1.81 | 76.64 | 0.39 |
| Clustering coefficient | 0.22 ± 0.11 | 0.17 ± 0.12 | 0.083 | 1.76 | 76.75 | 0.38 |
| Path length | 2.83 ± 1.23 | 3.40 ± 1.17 | 0.028 | –2.24 | 84.14 | 0.47 |
|
| ||||||
| Strength | 7.40 ± 2.98 | 7.35 ± 3.02 | 0.937 | 0.08 | 81.53 | 0.02 |
| Clustering coefficient | 0.10 ± 0.04 | 0.10 ± 0.04 | 0.770 | 0.29 | 80.98 | 0.06 |
| Path length | 5.22 ± 1.31 | 5.18 ± 1.14 | 0.889 | 0.14 | 87.41 | 0.03 |
|
| ||||||
| Strength | 7.37 ± 2.46 | 6.83 ± 2.32 | 0.284 | 1.08 | 84.52 | 0.23 |
| Clustering coefficient | 0.10 ± 0.03 | 0.09 ± 0.03 | 0.133 | 1.52 | 85.31 | 0.32 |
| Path length | 5.15 ± 1.27 | 5.42 ± 1.34 | 0.335 | –0.97 | 79.48 | 0.21 |
DF, degree of freedom.
FIGURE 3Comparison of the nodal network indices (strength and clustering coefficient) between the post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) patients and healthy controls (HCs) in all frequency bands for each positive and negative network. Spatial distribution is described using normalized t-values (range: –1 to 1) between two groups for each nodal network index and each frequency band. Blue color means the significantly reduced nodal network values in PTSD patients compared to HCs.
FIGURE 4Relationships between the symptom scores [Impact Event Scale-Revised (IES-R), Back’s Depression Inventory (BDI), and Back’s Anxiety Inventory (BAI)] and nodal clustering coefficient in theta frequency band in the post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) patients. The clustering coefficient of each patient has significantly negative correlations with symptom scores.