Patterson J V, Michalewski H J, Starr A
Department of Neurology, University of California, Irvine 92717.
Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1988 Nov-Dec;71(6):450-60. doi: 10.1016/0168-5597(88)90049-4.
Auditory event-related potentials (ERPs) were investigated in 15 demented (12 presumed Alzheimer's, 3 cerebrovascular), 8 depressed, and 15 normal older, and 12 normal young, subjects. Both latencies from conventional averages and latency variability measures from single trials were derived for the N100, P200, N200, and P300 components of the ERP recorded from Fz, Cz and Pz scalp placements in a task requiring detection of an infrequent target tone among a series of frequent non-target tones. The P300 component most consistently separated the groups. Demented subjects had longer P300 latencies and greater P300 latency variability than both control groups and the depressed group. Age differences were observed for P300 latency, but not for P300 latency variability. Amplitudes were not significantly different among the groups. Reaction times (RTs) to the targets were longest for the demented subjects and shortest for the young controls, with the depressed and normal older control groups falling in between. Correlations between RT and P300 latency from single trials did not differentiate the groups. Using regression analysis to evaluate the deviation of P300 latency and latency variability for the patients from the predicted values for normal controls, no misclassifications of depressed patients occurred, but only 27% of the demented individuals were correctly classified using P300 variability, and 13% using P300 latency. These findings indicate that ERP measures using the 'oddball' target detection paradigm were useful in describing group differences, but were not sufficiently sensitive to be used in differentiating demented persons on an individual basis for clinical diagnosis.
对15名痴呆患者(12名疑似阿尔茨海默病患者,3名脑血管病患者)、8名抑郁症患者、15名正常老年人以及12名正常年轻人进行了听觉事件相关电位(ERP)研究。在一项任务中,要求从一系列频繁出现的非目标音调中检测出不常出现的目标音调,分别从Fz、Cz和Pz头皮部位记录ERP的N100、P200、N200和P300成分,得出传统平均值的潜伏期以及单次试验的潜伏期变异性测量值。P300成分最能一致地区分不同组。痴呆患者的P300潜伏期比对照组和抑郁症组都长,且P300潜伏期变异性更大。观察到P300潜伏期存在年龄差异,但P300潜伏期变异性不存在年龄差异。各组之间的波幅无显著差异。痴呆患者对目标的反应时间(RTs)最长,年轻对照组最短,抑郁症组和正常老年对照组介于两者之间。单次试验中RT与P300潜伏期之间的相关性并未区分不同组。使用回归分析评估患者P300潜伏期和潜伏期变异性与正常对照预测值的偏差,抑郁症患者没有出现误分类,但仅27%的痴呆个体使用P300变异性被正确分类,使用P300潜伏期的正确分类率为13%。这些发现表明,使用“oddball”目标检测范式的ERP测量方法有助于描述组间差异,但在个体层面上用于区分痴呆患者以进行临床诊断时不够敏感。