4.4 Article Proceedings Paper

fMRI response to spatial working memory in adolescents with comorbid marijuana and alcohol use disorders

期刊

DRUG AND ALCOHOL DEPENDENCE
卷 79, 期 2, 页码 201-210

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2005.01.009

关键词

alcohol abuse; marijuana abuse; fMRI; adolescents

资金

  1. NIAAA NIH HHS [R21 AA12519, R01 AA13419, R01 AA013419] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIDA NIH HHS [R01 DA021182-01, R21 DA015228, DA15228, R01 DA021182] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Alcohol and marijuana use are prevalent in adolescence, yet the neural impact of concomitant use remains unclear. We previously demonstrated functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) response to spatial working memory (SWM) among teens with alcohol use disorders (AUD) compared to controls, and predicted that adolescents with marijuana aid alcohol use disorders would show additional abnormalities. Participants were three groups of 15-17-year-olds: 19 non-abusing controls, 15 AUD teens with limited exposure to drugs, and 15 teens with comorbid marijuana and alcohol use disorders (MAUD) and minimal other drug experience. After > 2 days' abstinence, participants performed a SWM task during fMRI acquisition. fMRI brain response patterns differed between groups, despite similar performance on the task. MAUD youths showed less activation in inferior frontal and temporal regions than controls, and more response in other prefrontal regions. Compared to AUD teens, MAUD youths also showed less inferior frontal and temporal activation, but more medial frontal response. Overall, MAUD youths showed different brain response abnormalities than teens with AUD alone, despite relatively short histories of substance involvement. This pattern could suggest compensation for marijuana-related attention and working memory deficits. However, relatively recent use and premorbid features may influence results, and should be examined in future studies. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.4
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