Centre for Mental Health, Faculty of Health, Arts and Design, School of Health Sciences, Swinburne University, Melbourne, Australia; Melbourne Neuropsychiatry Centre, Department of Psychiatry, University of Melbourne and Melbourne Health.
Melbourne Neuropsychiatry Centre, Department of Psychiatry, University of Melbourne and Melbourne Health; St Vincent's Mental Health, St Vincent's Hospital, VIC, Australia.
J Affect Disord. 2021 Feb 15;281:776-785. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2020.11.064. Epub 2020 Nov 13.
Characterisation of brain morphological features common to cognitively similar individuals with bipolar disorder (BD) and schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD) may be key to understanding their shared neurobiological deficits. In the current study we examined whether three previously characterised cross-diagnostic cognitive subgroups differed among themselves and in comparison to healthy controls across measures of brain morphology.
T1-weighted structural magnetic resonance imaging scans were obtained for 143 individuals; 65 healthy controls and 78 patients (SSD, n = 40; BD I, n = 38) classified into three cross-diagnostic cognitive subgroups: Globally Impaired (n = 24), Selectively Impaired (n = 32), and Superior/Near-Normal (n = 22). Cognitive subgroups were compared to each other and healthy controls on three separate analyses investigating (1) global, (2) regional, and (3) vertex-wise comparisons of brain volume, thickness, and surface area.
No significant subgroup differences were evident in global measures of brain morphology. In region of interest analyses, the Selectively Impaired subgroup had greater right accumbens volume than those Superior/Near-Normal subgroup and healthy controls, and the Superior/Near-Normal subgroup had reduced volume of the left entorhinal region compared to all other groups. In vertex-wise comparisons, the Globally Impaired subgroup had greater right precentral volume than the Selectively Impaired subgroup, and thicker cortex in the postcentral region relative to the Superior/Near-Normal subgroup.
Exploration of medication effects was limited in our data.
Although some differences were evident in this sample, generally cross-diagnostic cognitive subgroups of individuals with SSD and BD did not appear to be clearly distinguished by patterns in brain morphology.
对具有双相情感障碍 (BD) 和精神分裂症谱系障碍 (SSD) 的认知相似个体的共同脑形态特征进行特征描述，可能是理解其共同神经生物学缺陷的关键。在当前的研究中，我们研究了三个以前定义的跨诊断认知亚组在脑形态学测量方面是否存在差异，以及与健康对照组相比。
对 143 名个体进行 T1 加权结构磁共振成像扫描；65 名健康对照者和 78 名患者（SSD，n=40；BD I，n=38）分为三个跨诊断认知亚组：整体受损（n=24）、选择性受损（n=32）和正常/接近正常（n=22）。对认知亚组进行了三项独立分析，比较彼此和健康对照组之间的差异：（1）全脑，（2）区域，（3）脑体积、厚度和表面积的顶点比较。
在全脑形态学的整体测量中，没有明显的亚组差异。在感兴趣区域分析中，选择性受损亚组的右侧伏隔核体积大于正常/接近正常亚组和健康对照组，正常/接近正常亚组的左侧内嗅区体积小于其他所有组。在顶点比较中，整体受损亚组的右侧中央前回体积大于选择性受损亚组，后中央回的皮质厚度大于正常/接近正常亚组。
我们的数据对药物效应的探索是有限的。
尽管在本样本中观察到一些差异，但 SSD 和 BD 个体的跨诊断认知亚组在脑形态学模式上似乎没有明显区分。
