Pattern of P50 suppression deficit in patients with epilepsy and individuals with schizophrenia

Becker, Jéfferson; Filho, Irênio Gomes da Silva; Filho, Hélio Fernandes da Silva; Schuch, Alice; Ramos, Fernanda Lia de Paula; Ghisolfi, Eduardo S.; Lara, Diogo R.; Costa, Jaderson Costa da

doi:10.1590/s0004-282x2011000400010

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This type of sensory suppression is usually observed in the auditory system by using paired-pulse suppression paradigms, in which two identical stimuli are successively presented, and is considered to represent processes that suppress redundant information. Such suppression is clinically important, because previous studies have shown deficits in paired-pulse suppression in patients with various conditions, including schizophrenia (Bramon et al 2004; Patterson et al 2008; Potter et al 2006; Turetsky et al 2007), bipolar disorder (Cheng et al 2016), epilepsy (Becker et al 2011), and attention-deficit/hyperactive disorder (Holstein et al 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Suppression of Somatosensory Evoked Cortical Responses by Noxious Stimuli

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Paired-pulse suppression refers to attenuation of neural activity in response to a second stimulus and has a pivotal role in inhibition of redundant sensory inputs. Previous studies have suggested that cortical responses to a somatosensory stimulus are modulated not only by a preceding same stimulus, but also by stimulus from a different submodality. Using magnetoencephalography, we examined somatosensory suppression induced by three different conditioning stimuli. The test stimulus was a train of electrical pulses to the dorsum of the left hand at 100 Hz lasting 1500 ms. For the pulse train, the intensity of the stimulus was abruptly increased at 1200 ms. Cortical responses to the abrupt intensity change were recorded and used as the test response. Conditioning stimuli were presented at 600 ms as pure tones, either innocuous or noxious electrical stimulation to the right foot. Four stimulus conditions were used: (1) Test alone, (2) Test + auditory stimulus, (3) Test + somatosensory stimulus, and (4) Test + nociceptive stimulus. Our results showed that the amplitude of the test response was significantly smaller for conditions (3) and (4) in the secondary somatosensory cortex contralateral (cSII) and ipsilateral (iSII) to the stimulated side as compared to the response to condition (1), whereas the amplitude of the response in the primary somatosensory cortex did not differ among the conditions. The auditory stimulus did not have effects on somatosensory change-related response. These findings show that somatosensory suppression was induced by not only a conditioning stimulus of the same somatosensory submodality and the same cutaneous site to the test stimulus, but also by that of a different submodality in a remote area.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Suppression of Somatosensory Evoked Cortical Responses by Noxious Stimuli

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Paired pulse suppression, an electrophysiological measurement of cortical responses to 2 consecutive identical auditory stimuli spaced 500 ms apart [ 9 , 10 ], is used to detect long-latency suppression, in which the amplitude of an evoked response at approximately 50 ms (P50) is compared between the first and second stimuli. This measurement technique is clinically important, as previous studies have shown deficits in paired-pulse suppression in patients with schizophrenia [ 10 – 14 ], bipolar disorder [ 15 ], panic disorder [ 16 ], epilepsy [ 17 ], and attention-deficit/hyperactive disorder [ 18 ]. In addition, paired-pulse suppression is also related to increased risk for developing schizophrenia [ 19 ] as well as deficits in attention processing in schizophrenia [ 20 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our paradigm may be useful for evaluating inhibitory function in individual subjects in clinical situations, because many diseases such as epilepsy [ 17 ] are considered to cause deficits in inhibitory mechanisms. However, it remains unclear whether inhibition of a specific auditory system reflects the fundamental functions of inhibitory circuits in an individual, as only a few studies have evaluated the relationships among auditory and sensory systems in healthy subjects [ 43 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-latency suppression of auditory and somatosensory change-related cortical responses

Takeuchi¹,

Sugiyama²,

Inui³

et al. 2018

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sensory suppression is a mechanism that attenuates selective information. As for long-latency suppression in auditory and somatosensory systems, paired-pulse suppression, observed as 2 identical stimuli spaced by approximately 500 ms, is widely known, though its mechanism remains to be elucidated. In the present study, we investigated the relationship between auditory and somatosensory long-latency suppression of change-related cortical responses using magnetoencephalography. Somatosensory change-related responses were evoked by an abrupt increase in stimulus strength in a train of current-constant square wave pulses at 100 Hz to the left median nerve at the wrist. Furthermore, auditory change-related responses were elicited by an increase in sound pressure by 15 dB in a continuous sound composed of a train of 25-ms pure tones. Binaural stimulation was used in Experiment 1, while monaural stimulation was used in Experiment 2. For both somatosensory and auditory stimuli, the conditioning and test stimuli were identical, and inserted at 2400 and 3000 ms, respectively. The results showed clear suppression of the test response in the bilateral parisylvian region, but not in the postcentral gyrus of the contralateral hemisphere in the somatosensory system. Similarly, the test response in the bilateral supratemporal plane (N100m) was suppressed in the auditory system. Furthermore, there was a significant correlation between suppression of right N100m and right parisylvian activity, suggesting that similar mechanisms are involved in both. Finally, a high test-retest reliability for suppression was seen with both modalities. Suppression revealed in the present study is considered to reflect sensory inhibition ability in individual subjects.

show abstract

“…For example, it was reported that positive symptoms of schizophrenia, such as auditory hallucinations [7, 8], and also the risk for developing schizophrenia [9] have a relationship to impairment of P50 suppression. Other clinical conditions also known to be related to impairment of sensory suppression include bipolar disorder [10], panic disorder [11], epilepsy [12], and attention-deficit/hyper-active disorder [13]. Hence, P50 suppression deficit has been speculated to be associated with varied cognitive impairments in a wide range of disorders and their symptoms.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

New paradigm for auditory paired pulse suppression

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sensory gating is a mechanism of sensory processing used to prevent an overflow of irrelevant information, with some indexes, such as prepulse inhibition (PPI) and P50 suppression, often utilized for its evaluation. In addition, those are clinically important for diseases such as schizophrenia. In the present study, we investigated long-latency paired-pulse suppression of change-related cortical responses using magnetoencephalography. The test change-related response was evoked by an abrupt increase in sound pressure by 15 dB in a continuous sound composed of a train of 25-ms pure tones at 65 dB. By inserting a leading change stimulus (prepulse), we observed suppression of the test response. In Experiment 1, we examined the effects of conditioning-test intervals (CTI) using a 25-ms pure tone at 80 dB as both the test and prepulse. Our results showed clear suppression of the test response peaking at a CTI of 600 ms, while maximum inhibition was approximately 30%. In Experiment 2, the effects of sound pressure on prepulse were examined by inserting prepulses 600 ms prior to the test stimulus. We found that a paired-pulse suppression greater than 25% was obtained by prepulses larger than 77 dB, i.e., 12 dB louder than the background, suggesting that long latency suppression requires a relatively strong prepulse to obtain adequate suppression, different than short-latency paired-pulse suppression reported in previous studies. In Experiment 3, we confirmed similar levels of suppression using electroencephalography. These results suggested that two identical change stimuli spaced by 600 ms were appropriate for observing the long-latency inhibition. The present method requires only a short inspection time and is non-invasive.

show abstract

Pattern of P50 suppression deficit in patients with epilepsy and individuals with schizophrenia

Cited by 4 publications

References 29 publications

Suppression of Somatosensory Evoked Cortical Responses by Noxious Stimuli

Suppression of Somatosensory Evoked Cortical Responses by Noxious Stimuli

Long-latency suppression of auditory and somatosensory change-related cortical responses

New paradigm for auditory paired pulse suppression

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About