Cargando…
Differences between memory encoding and retrieval failure in mild cognitive impairment: results from quantitative electroencephalography and magnetic resonance volumetry
BACKGROUND: The memory impairments in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) can be classified into encoding (EF) and retrieval (RF) failure, which can be affected by underlying pathomechanism. We explored the differences structurally and functionally. METHODS: We compared quantitative electroencephalograp...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7784298/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33397486 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13195-020-00739-7 |
_version_ | 1783632280141430784 |
---|---|
author | Han, Su-Hyun Pyun, Jung-Min Yeo, Soeun Kang, Dong Won Jeong, Ho Tae Kang, Seung Wan Kim, SangYun Youn, Young Chul |
author_facet | Han, Su-Hyun Pyun, Jung-Min Yeo, Soeun Kang, Dong Won Jeong, Ho Tae Kang, Seung Wan Kim, SangYun Youn, Young Chul |
author_sort | Han, Su-Hyun |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The memory impairments in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) can be classified into encoding (EF) and retrieval (RF) failure, which can be affected by underlying pathomechanism. We explored the differences structurally and functionally. METHODS: We compared quantitative electroencephalography (qEEG) power spectra and connectivity between 87 MCI patients with EF and 78 MCI with RF using iSyncBrain® (iMediSync Inc., Republic of Korea) (https://isyncbrain.com/). Voxel-based morphometric analysis of the gray matter (GM) in the MCI groups and 71 cognitive normal controls was also done using the Computational Anatomy Toolbox 12 (http://www.neuro.uni-jena.de/cat/). RESULTS: qEEG showed higher frontal theta and lower beta2 band power, and higher theta connectivity in the EF. There was no statistically significant difference in GM volume between the EF and RF. However, when compared to normal control, GM volume reductions due to EF in the left thalamus and bilateral hippocampi and reductions due to RF in the left thalamus, right superior frontal lobe, right superior temporal lobe, and right middle cingulum were observed (p < 0.05, family-wise error correction). CONCLUSIONS: MCI differs functionally and structurally according to their specific memory impairments. The EF findings are structurally and functionally more consistent with the prodromal Alzheimer’s disease stage than the RF findings. Since this study is a cross-sectional study, prospective follow-up studies are needed to investigate whether different types of memory impairments can predict the underlying pathology of amnestic MCI. Additionally, insufficient sample size may lead to ambiguous statistical findings in direct comparisons, and a larger patient cohort could more robustly identify differences in GM volume reductions between the EF and the RF group. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7784298 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-77842982021-01-14 Differences between memory encoding and retrieval failure in mild cognitive impairment: results from quantitative electroencephalography and magnetic resonance volumetry Han, Su-Hyun Pyun, Jung-Min Yeo, Soeun Kang, Dong Won Jeong, Ho Tae Kang, Seung Wan Kim, SangYun Youn, Young Chul Alzheimers Res Ther Research BACKGROUND: The memory impairments in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) can be classified into encoding (EF) and retrieval (RF) failure, which can be affected by underlying pathomechanism. We explored the differences structurally and functionally. METHODS: We compared quantitative electroencephalography (qEEG) power spectra and connectivity between 87 MCI patients with EF and 78 MCI with RF using iSyncBrain® (iMediSync Inc., Republic of Korea) (https://isyncbrain.com/). Voxel-based morphometric analysis of the gray matter (GM) in the MCI groups and 71 cognitive normal controls was also done using the Computational Anatomy Toolbox 12 (http://www.neuro.uni-jena.de/cat/). RESULTS: qEEG showed higher frontal theta and lower beta2 band power, and higher theta connectivity in the EF. There was no statistically significant difference in GM volume between the EF and RF. However, when compared to normal control, GM volume reductions due to EF in the left thalamus and bilateral hippocampi and reductions due to RF in the left thalamus, right superior frontal lobe, right superior temporal lobe, and right middle cingulum were observed (p < 0.05, family-wise error correction). CONCLUSIONS: MCI differs functionally and structurally according to their specific memory impairments. The EF findings are structurally and functionally more consistent with the prodromal Alzheimer’s disease stage than the RF findings. Since this study is a cross-sectional study, prospective follow-up studies are needed to investigate whether different types of memory impairments can predict the underlying pathology of amnestic MCI. Additionally, insufficient sample size may lead to ambiguous statistical findings in direct comparisons, and a larger patient cohort could more robustly identify differences in GM volume reductions between the EF and the RF group. BioMed Central 2021-01-04 /pmc/articles/PMC7784298/ /pubmed/33397486 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13195-020-00739-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Han, Su-Hyun Pyun, Jung-Min Yeo, Soeun Kang, Dong Won Jeong, Ho Tae Kang, Seung Wan Kim, SangYun Youn, Young Chul Differences between memory encoding and retrieval failure in mild cognitive impairment: results from quantitative electroencephalography and magnetic resonance volumetry |
title | Differences between memory encoding and retrieval failure in mild cognitive impairment: results from quantitative electroencephalography and magnetic resonance volumetry |
title_full | Differences between memory encoding and retrieval failure in mild cognitive impairment: results from quantitative electroencephalography and magnetic resonance volumetry |
title_fullStr | Differences between memory encoding and retrieval failure in mild cognitive impairment: results from quantitative electroencephalography and magnetic resonance volumetry |
title_full_unstemmed | Differences between memory encoding and retrieval failure in mild cognitive impairment: results from quantitative electroencephalography and magnetic resonance volumetry |
title_short | Differences between memory encoding and retrieval failure in mild cognitive impairment: results from quantitative electroencephalography and magnetic resonance volumetry |
title_sort | differences between memory encoding and retrieval failure in mild cognitive impairment: results from quantitative electroencephalography and magnetic resonance volumetry |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7784298/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33397486 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13195-020-00739-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hansuhyun differencesbetweenmemoryencodingandretrievalfailureinmildcognitiveimpairmentresultsfromquantitativeelectroencephalographyandmagneticresonancevolumetry AT pyunjungmin differencesbetweenmemoryencodingandretrievalfailureinmildcognitiveimpairmentresultsfromquantitativeelectroencephalographyandmagneticresonancevolumetry AT yeosoeun differencesbetweenmemoryencodingandretrievalfailureinmildcognitiveimpairmentresultsfromquantitativeelectroencephalographyandmagneticresonancevolumetry AT kangdongwon differencesbetweenmemoryencodingandretrievalfailureinmildcognitiveimpairmentresultsfromquantitativeelectroencephalographyandmagneticresonancevolumetry AT jeonghotae differencesbetweenmemoryencodingandretrievalfailureinmildcognitiveimpairmentresultsfromquantitativeelectroencephalographyandmagneticresonancevolumetry AT kangseungwan differencesbetweenmemoryencodingandretrievalfailureinmildcognitiveimpairmentresultsfromquantitativeelectroencephalographyandmagneticresonancevolumetry AT kimsangyun differencesbetweenmemoryencodingandretrievalfailureinmildcognitiveimpairmentresultsfromquantitativeelectroencephalographyandmagneticresonancevolumetry AT younyoungchul differencesbetweenmemoryencodingandretrievalfailureinmildcognitiveimpairmentresultsfromquantitativeelectroencephalographyandmagneticresonancevolumetry |