Suppr超能文献

双相障碍临床亚组的神经认知特征:一项荟萃分析。

Neurocognitive features in clinical subgroups of bipolar disorder: A meta-analysis.

机构信息

Dokuz Eylül University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, Izmir, Turkey; Melbourne Neuropsychiatry Centre, Department of Psychiatry, University of Melbourne and Melbourne Health, Carlton South, Victoria 3053, Australia.

出版信息

J Affect Disord. 2018 Mar 15;229:125-134. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2017.12.057. Epub 2017 Dec 29.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

There is a significant cognitive heterogeneity in bipolar disorder (BD). The aim of this systematic review was to examine the potential distinctive neuropsychological of features of clinical subgroups of BD. A literature search investigating cognitive differences between potential subtypes of BD was conducted.

METHODS

It was possible to conduct a meta-analysis of studies investigating the relationship between cognitive deficits and subgroups of DSM-IV BD (type I (BD-I) and type II (BD-II)), subgroups based on history of psychosis (PBD and NPBD). The cognitive domains investigated in this meta-analysis included verbal memory, visual memory, processing speed, executive functions speed (EF-speed), EF-accuracy, attention, working memory, social cognition. Current meta-analysis included 48 reports and compared cognitive performances of 1211 BD-I and 836 BD-II patients. It also compared cognitive functioning in 1017 PBD and 744 NPBD patients.

RESULTS

Both history of psychosis (d = 0.19) and BD-I (d = 0.17) diagnosis were associated with modestly more pronounced global cognitive impairment. In specific domains, BD-I significantly underperformed BD-II in verbal memory, processing speed, EF-speed, EF-accuracy (d = 0.15-0.26). PBD was associated with significantly impaired cognition compared to NPBD in verbal memory, processing speed, EF-speed, EF-accuracy, working memory and social cognition (d = 0.12-0.28).

CONCLUSION

In BD, history of psychosis and full-manic episode are modestly associated with increased cognitive deficits. Neurocognitive differences between clinical subtypes of BD are quite subtle and are not distinctive. Furthermore, other factors reflecting differences in illness severity can explain observed between-group differences. Most of the cognitive heterogeneity in BD cannot be explained by proposed subtypes of BD.

摘要

目的

双相障碍(BD)存在显著的认知异质性。本系统评价的目的是研究 BD 的临床亚组之间潜在的独特神经心理学特征。对调查 BD 潜在亚型之间认知差异的文献进行了检索。

方法

对研究认知缺陷与 DSM-IV BD 亚组(I 型(BD-I)和 II 型(BD-II))、基于精神病病史的亚组(PBD 和 NPBD)之间关系的研究进行了荟萃分析。本荟萃分析研究的认知领域包括言语记忆、视觉记忆、加工速度、执行功能速度(EF-速度)、执行功能准确性(EF-准确性)、注意力、工作记忆、社会认知。当前的荟萃分析包括 48 项报告,比较了 1211 名 BD-I 和 836 名 BD-II 患者的认知表现。它还比较了 1017 名 PBD 和 744 名 NPBD 患者的认知功能。

结果

精神病病史(d = 0.19)和 BD-I 诊断(d = 0.17)均与中度更明显的整体认知障碍相关。在特定领域,BD-I 在言语记忆、加工速度、EF-速度、EF-准确性方面明显逊于 BD-II(d = 0.15-0.26)。与 NPBD 相比,PBD 与言语记忆、加工速度、EF-速度、EF-准确性、工作记忆和社会认知受损显著相关(d = 0.12-0.28)。

结论

在 BD 中,精神病病史和完全躁狂发作与认知缺陷增加适度相关。BD 的临床亚型之间的神经认知差异相当微妙,没有明显区别。此外,反映疾病严重程度差异的其他因素可以解释观察到的组间差异。BD 中的大部分认知异质性不能用提出的 BD 亚型来解释。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验