Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
Tipo del documento
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Psychiatry Res ; 337: 115985, 2024 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38820652

RESUMEN

The contribution of anticholinergic burden to cognitive function in patients with treatment resistant schizophrenia (TRS) is uncertain. This case-control study aims to comprehensively examine the association between treatment resistance and cognitive functions and the contribution of anticholinergic burden in patients with schizophrenia. Anticholinergic burden of all patients was calculated using the Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden scale. Exploratory Factor Analysis of 11 cognitive assessments identified four cognitive domains: verbal memory, attention and general cognitive functions, visual memory and processing speed, and executive function. Two structural equation models (SEM) examined the relationship of TRS and these cognitive functions with, and without considering anticholinergic burden. A total of 288 participants were included (TRS N=111, non-TRS N=177). Patients with TRS performed poorer than the non-TRS group only in the executive function domain. Anticholinergic burden contributed significantly to the attention and general cognitive functions, visual memory and processing speed, and executive function. The impact of TRS on executive function was no longer significant after adding anticholinergic burden to the SEM. Results suggested that anticholinergic burden contributes to a wide range of cognitive function impairment in patients with schizophrenia and is likely to be part of the apparent differences of cognitive function between TRS and non-TRS.


Asunto(s)
Antagonistas Colinérgicos , Disfunción Cognitiva , Función Ejecutiva , Humanos , Antagonistas Colinérgicos/efectos adversos , Masculino , Femenino , Adulto , Función Ejecutiva/efectos de los fármacos , Función Ejecutiva/fisiología , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Persona de Mediana Edad , Disfunción Cognitiva/inducido químicamente , Esquizofrenia Resistente al Tratamiento/tratamiento farmacológico , Atención/efectos de los fármacos , Cognición/efectos de los fármacos , Antipsicóticos/efectos adversos , Antipsicóticos/farmacología , Esquizofrenia/tratamiento farmacológico , Pruebas Neuropsicológicas , Psicología del Esquizofrénico , Memoria/efectos de los fármacos
2.
Schizophrenia (Heidelb) ; 9(1): 65, 2023 Sep 26.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37752161

RESUMEN

This systematic review aimed to review neuroimaging studies comparing clozapine-resistant schizophrenia patients with clozapine-responding patients, and with first-line antipsychotic responding (FLR) patients. A total of 19 studies including 6 longitudinal studies were identified. Imaging techniques comprised computerized tomography (CT, n = 3), structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI, n = 7), magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS, n = 5), functional MRI (n = 1), single-photon emission computerized tomography (SPECT, n = 3) and diffusion tensor imaging (DTI, n = 1). The most consistent finding was hypo-frontality in the clozapine-resistant group compared with the clozapine-responding group with possible differences in frontal-striatal-basal ganglia circuitry as well as the GABA level between the two treatment-resistant groups. Additional statistically significant findings were reported when comparing clozapine-resistant patients with the FLR group, including lower cortical thickness and brain volume of multiple brain regions as well as lower Glx/Cr level in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Both treatment-resistant groups were found to have extensive differences in neurobiological features in comparison with the FLR group. Overall results suggested treatment-resistant schizophrenia is likely to be a neurobiological distinct type of the illness. Clozapine-resistant and clozapine-responding schizophrenia are likely to have both shared and distinct neurobiological features. However, conclusions from existing studies are limited, and future multi-center collaborative studies are required with a consensus clinical definition of patient samples, multimodal imaging tools, and longitudinal study designs.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA