4.5 Article

Association between delayed recall and T2*relaxation time of the subiculum in adolescents: Implications for ultra-high-field magnetic resonance imaging

Journal

PSYCHIATRY AND CLINICAL NEUROSCIENCES
Volume 73, Issue 6, Pages 340-346

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/pcn.12843

Keywords

adolescent; delayed recall; hippocampus; subiculum; ultra-high-field

Funding

  1. Brain Research Program through the National Research Foundation (NRF) of Korea - Ministry of Science, ICT & Future Planning [NRF 2016M3C7A190 4338]
  2. NRF - Korean government [2016R1A2B4011561]
  3. National Research Foundation of Korea [2016R1A2B4011561] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aim The aim of this study was to assess neuropsychological correlations with the T2* relaxation time (T2*-RT) of hippocampal subregions in adolescents using ultra-high-field (UHF) 7.0-T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Methods We assessed the T2*-RT of hippocampal subregions in 31 healthy 11th- or 12th-grade high school students using an UHF 7.0-T MRI system. T2*-RT of the cornu ammonis (CA) 1, CA2, CA3, and CA4 subregions and the subiculum were calculated for both the left and right hippocampus. Seven subtests of the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery were administered to the subjects to assess visuospatial memory. Results Poor performances in delayed recall in the pattern-recognition test were significantly correlated with longer T2*-RT in the bilateral subiculum (right, r = -0.480, P = 0.006; left, r = -0.648, P < 0.001) and the left CA2 (r = -0.480, P = 0.006). Conclusion This study showed that longer T2*-RT in the subiculum were associated with poorer performances in delayed recall in the visual memory tasks. This finding suggests that the subiculum might play a predominant role in delayed recall in adolescents.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available