4.1 Article

Neurological soft signs and brain morphology in people living with HIV

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROVIROLOGY
卷 28, 期 2, 页码 236-247

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s13365-022-01071-6

关键词

NSS; HIV-associated neurocognitive disorder; HAND; HIV-associated dementia; Structural MRI

资金

  1. Ruprecht-Karls-Universitat Heidelberg

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Neurological soft signs (NSS) are commonly found in severe psychiatric disorders and organic brain diseases. This study found significantly elevated NSS scores in persons with HIV and HAND, with associated gray matter reduction in the insula and cerebellum.
Neurological soft signs (NSS) are a common feature of severe psychiatric disorders such as schizophrenia but are also prevalent in organic brain diseases like HIV-associated neurocognitive disorder (HAND) or Alzheimer's disease. While distinct associations between NSS, neurocognition, and cerebral regions were demonstrated in schizophrenia, these associations still have to be elucidated in HIV. Therefore, we investigated 36 persons with HIV of whom 16 were neurocognitively healthy and 20 were diagnosed with HAND. NSS were assessed using the Heidelberg scale. NSS scores were correlated with gray matter (GM) using whole brain voxel-based morphometry. Results showed significantly elevated NSS in the HAND group when compared to the neurocognitively healthy with respect to NSS total score and the subscores orientation and complex motor tasks. While the two groups showed only minor, non-significant GM differences, higher NSS scores (subscales motor coordination, orientation) were significantly correlated with GM reduction in the right insula and cerebellum (FWE-corrected). Our results corroborate elevated NSS in HIV+ patients with HAND in contrast to cognitively unimpaired patients. In addition, cerebral correlates of NSS with GM reductions in insula and cerebellum were revealed. Taken together, NSS in this patient group could be considered a marker of cerebral damage and neurocognitive deficits.

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

4.1
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