Higher volumes of hippocampal subfields in pediatric obsessive-compulsive disorder

Vattimo, Edoardo Filippo de Queiroz; Santos, Antonio Carlos; Hoexter, Marcelo Q.; Frudit, Paula; Miguel, Eurí­pedes Constantino; Shavitt, Roseli G.; Batistuzzo, Marcelo C.

doi:10.1016/j.pscychresns.2020.111200

Cited by 7 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recent developments in structural MRI segmentation techniques have allowed for the robust delineation of HA subfields using a Bayesian algorithm that is based on the transformation of manual segmentation to an automated atlas (Saygin et al, 2017). Indeed, a previous study showed that paediatric patients with OCD have larger hippocampal subfields, i.e., the left subiculum body, left cornu ammonis (CA) 4, left granule cell layer of dentate gyrus, left molecular layer, and right parasubiculum, compared to HCs (Vattimo et al, 2021). Recent reports indicate that medication-free patients with OCD have smaller volumes in the hippocampal subiculum, presubiculum, CA2/3 and tail (Zhang et al, 2019) and smaller basolateral and central amygdala subfield volumes (Zhang et al, 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hippocampal and amygdala subfield volumes in obsessive-compulsive disorder differ according to medication status

Ntwatwa

Löchner

Roos

et al. 2023

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intro: Although it has been suggested that the hippocampus and amygdala (HA) are involved in the neurobiology of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), volumetric findings have been inconsistent. Furthermore, the HA consist of heterogenous anatomic units with specific functions and cytoarchitecture, and little work has been undertaken on the volumetry of these subfields in OCD. Methods: T1-weighted images from 381 patients with OCD and 338 healthy controls (HCs) from the OCD Brain Imaging Consortium were segmented to produce twelve hippocampal subfields and nine amygdala subfields using FreeSurfer 6.0. We assessed between-group differences in subfield volume using a mixed-effects model adjusted for age, quadratic effects of age, sex, site, and whole HA volume. Given evidence of confounding effects of clinical characteristics on brain volumes in OCD, we also performed subgroup analyses to examine subfield volume in relation to comorbid anxiety and depression, medication status, and symptom severity. Results: Patients with OCD and HCs did not significantly differ in HA subfield volume. However, medicated patients with OCD had significantly smaller hippocampal dentate gyrus (pFDR=0.042, d=-0.26) and molecular layer (pFDR=0.042, d=-0.29) and larger lateral (pFDR=0.049, d=0.23) and basal (pFDR=0.049, d=0.25) amygdala subfields than HCs. Unmedicated patients had significantly smaller hippocampal CA1 (pFDR=0.016, d=-0.28) than HCs. No association was detected between any subfield volume and OCD severity. Conclusion: Differences in HA subfields between OCD and HCs are dependent on medication status, in line with previous work on other brain volumetric alterations in OCD. This emphasizes the importance of considering psychotropic medication in neuroimaging studies of OCD.

show abstract