物质使用障碍患者的经典和非经典定量脑电图测量的评估。

Clinical EEG and neuroscience Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2023-10-17 DOI:10.1177/15500594231208245
Alioth Guerrero-Aranda, Francisco Javier Alvarado-Rodríguez, Andrea Enríquez-Zaragoza, Jaime Carmona-Huerta, Andrés Antonio González-Garrido
{"title":"物质使用障碍患者的经典和非经典定量脑电图测量的评估。","authors":"Alioth Guerrero-Aranda, Francisco Javier Alvarado-Rodríguez, Andrea Enríquez-Zaragoza, Jaime Carmona-Huerta, Andrés Antonio González-Garrido","doi":"10.1177/15500594231208245","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>Background:</i> People diagnosed with substance use disorders (SUDs) are at risk for impairment of brain function and structure. However, physicians still do not have any clinical biomarker of brain impairment that helps diagnose or treat these patients when needed. The most common method to study these patients is the classical electroencephalographic (EEG) analyses of absolute and relative powers, but this has limited individual clinical applicability. Other non-classical measures such as frequency band ratios and entropy show promise in these patients. Therefore, there is a need to expand the use of quantitative (q)EEG beyond classical measures in clinical populations. Our aim is to assess a group of classical and non-classical qEEG measures in a population with SUDs. <i>Methods:</i> We selected 56 non-medicated and drug-free adult patients (30 males) diagnosed with SUDs and admitted to Rehabilitation Clinics. According to qualitative EEG findings, patients were divided into four groups. We estimated the absolute and relative powers and calculated the entropy, and the alpha/(delta + theta) ratio. <i>Results:</i> Our findings showed a significant variability of absolute and relative powers among patients with SUDs. We also observed a decrease in the EEG-based entropy index and alpha/(theta + delta) ratio, mainly in posterior regions, in the patients with abnormal qualitative EEG. <i>Conclusions:</i> Our findings support the view that the power spectrum is not a reliable biomarker on an individual level. Thus, we suggest shifting the approach from the power spectrum toward other potential methods and designs that may offer greater clinical possibilities.</p>","PeriodicalId":93940,"journal":{"name":"Clinical EEG and neuroscience","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of Classical and Non-Classical Quantitative Electroencephalographic Measures in Patients with Substance Use Disorders.\",\"authors\":\"Alioth Guerrero-Aranda, Francisco Javier Alvarado-Rodríguez, Andrea Enríquez-Zaragoza, Jaime Carmona-Huerta, Andrés Antonio González-Garrido\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15500594231208245\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><i>Background:</i> People diagnosed with substance use disorders (SUDs) are at risk for impairment of brain function and structure. However, physicians still do not have any clinical biomarker of brain impairment that helps diagnose or treat these patients when needed. The most common method to study these patients is the classical electroencephalographic (EEG) analyses of absolute and relative powers, but this has limited individual clinical applicability. Other non-classical measures such as frequency band ratios and entropy show promise in these patients. Therefore, there is a need to expand the use of quantitative (q)EEG beyond classical measures in clinical populations. Our aim is to assess a group of classical and non-classical qEEG measures in a population with SUDs. <i>Methods:</i> We selected 56 non-medicated and drug-free adult patients (30 males) diagnosed with SUDs and admitted to Rehabilitation Clinics. According to qualitative EEG findings, patients were divided into four groups. We estimated the absolute and relative powers and calculated the entropy, and the alpha/(delta + theta) ratio. <i>Results:</i> Our findings showed a significant variability of absolute and relative powers among patients with SUDs. We also observed a decrease in the EEG-based entropy index and alpha/(theta + delta) ratio, mainly in posterior regions, in the patients with abnormal qualitative EEG. <i>Conclusions:</i> Our findings support the view that the power spectrum is not a reliable biomarker on an individual level. Thus, we suggest shifting the approach from the power spectrum toward other potential methods and designs that may offer greater clinical possibilities.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93940,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical EEG and neuroscience\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical EEG and neuroscience\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15500594231208245\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/10/17 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical EEG and neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15500594231208245","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:被诊断为物质使用障碍的人有大脑功能和结构受损的风险。然而,医生仍然没有任何脑损伤的临床生物标志物来帮助在需要时诊断或治疗这些患者。研究这些患者最常见的方法是对绝对功率和相对功率的经典脑电图(EEG)分析,但这限制了个体临床应用。其他非经典测量,如频带比和熵,在这些患者中显示出希望。因此,有必要在临床人群中扩大定量(q)脑电图的使用范围,使其超越经典测量。我们的目的是评估SUD人群中的一组经典和非经典qEEG测量。方法:我们选择了56名非药物和无药物的成年患者(30名男性),他们被诊断为SUDs并入住康复诊所。根据定性脑电图结果,将患者分为四组。我们估计了绝对功率和相对功率,并计算了熵,以及α/(δ + θ)比率。结果:我们的研究结果显示,SUDs患者的绝对功率和相对功率存在显著差异。我们还观察到基于EEG的熵指数和α/(θ + delta)比值,主要在后部区域,在定性脑电图异常的患者中。结论:我们的研究结果支持这样一种观点,即功率谱在个体水平上不是一个可靠的生物标志物。因此,我们建议将方法从功率谱转向其他可能提供更大临床可能性的潜在方法和设计。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessment of Classical and Non-Classical Quantitative Electroencephalographic Measures in Patients with Substance Use Disorders.

Background: People diagnosed with substance use disorders (SUDs) are at risk for impairment of brain function and structure. However, physicians still do not have any clinical biomarker of brain impairment that helps diagnose or treat these patients when needed. The most common method to study these patients is the classical electroencephalographic (EEG) analyses of absolute and relative powers, but this has limited individual clinical applicability. Other non-classical measures such as frequency band ratios and entropy show promise in these patients. Therefore, there is a need to expand the use of quantitative (q)EEG beyond classical measures in clinical populations. Our aim is to assess a group of classical and non-classical qEEG measures in a population with SUDs. Methods: We selected 56 non-medicated and drug-free adult patients (30 males) diagnosed with SUDs and admitted to Rehabilitation Clinics. According to qualitative EEG findings, patients were divided into four groups. We estimated the absolute and relative powers and calculated the entropy, and the alpha/(delta + theta) ratio. Results: Our findings showed a significant variability of absolute and relative powers among patients with SUDs. We also observed a decrease in the EEG-based entropy index and alpha/(theta + delta) ratio, mainly in posterior regions, in the patients with abnormal qualitative EEG. Conclusions: Our findings support the view that the power spectrum is not a reliable biomarker on an individual level. Thus, we suggest shifting the approach from the power spectrum toward other potential methods and designs that may offer greater clinical possibilities.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信