4.7 Review

Proton Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy of N-acetyl Aspartate in Chronic Schizophrenia, First Episode of Psychosis and High-Risk of Psychosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

期刊

NEUROSCIENCE AND BIOBEHAVIORAL REVIEWS
卷 119, 期 -, 页码 255-267

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.10.001

关键词

MRS; metabolism; N-acetyl aspartate (NAA); psychosis; schizophrenia; spectroscopy; meta-analysis; high risk of psychosis.

资金

  1. Medical Research Council-UK [MCA656-5QD30]
  2. Maudsley Charity [666]
  3. Brain and Behavior Research Foundation
  4. Wellcome Trust [094849/Z/10/Z]
  5. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London

向作者/读者索取更多资源

N-acetyl-aspartate (NAA) is a readily measured marker of neuronal metabolism. Previous analyses in schizophrenia have shown NAA levels are low in frontal, temporal and thalamic regions, but may be underpowered to detect effects in other regions, in high-risk states and in first episode psychosis. We searched for magnetic resonance spectroscopy studies comparing NAA in chronic schizophrenia, first episode psychosis and high risk of psychosis to controls. 182 studies were included and meta-analysed using a random-effects model for each region and illness stage. NAA levels were significantly lower than controls in the frontal lobe [Hedge's g = -0.36, p < 0.001], hippocampus [-0.52, p < 0.001], temporal lobe [-0.35, p = 0.031], thalamus [-0.32, p = 0.012] and parietal lobe [-0.25, p = 0.028] in chronic schizophrenia, and lower than controls in the frontal lobe [-0.26, p = 0.002], anterior cingulate cortex [-0.24, p = 0.016] and thalamus [-0.28, p = 0.028] in first episode psychosis. NAA was lower in high-risk of psychosis in the hippocampus [-0.20, p = 0.049]. In schizophrenia, NAA alterations appear to begin in hippocampus, frontal cortex and thalamus, and extend later to many other regions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据