机构地区:[1]苏州大学附属第三医院,常州213003 [2]南通大学附属常州儿童医院呼吸科,常州213003 [3]南通大学附属常州儿童医院健康研究中心,常州213003 [4]南通大学附属常州儿童医院神经科,常州213003
出 处:《中华行为医学与脑科学杂志》2016年第7期620-624,共5页Chinese Journal of Behavioral Medicine and Brain Science
基 金:江苏省临床医学科技专项(BL2014037);常州市卫生局重大课题项目(ZD201313);常州市科技支撑计划(社会发展)项目(CE20145042)
摘 要:目的采用数学事件相关电位(ERP)探讨睡眠呼吸障碍(SDB)儿童数学认知功能损害的特征及神经机制。方法15例SDB儿童和15例正常对照儿童。进行ERP实验。数学任务分计算过程(加、减法)和答案判断(正确、错误)两部分,使用BESA软件提取ERP,进行SDB与正常儿童Fz导联N1、P2、N2、P3潜伏期和波幅及行为学分析。结果(1)行为学:SDB组加、减计算的反应时间[M(P25,P75)]明显长于对照组[1086.83(986.17,1393.45)ms vs909.70(833.35,1117.82)ms,1233.74(1021.99,1388.76)ms vs 967.88(873.68,1137.32)ms](均P〈0.05)。(2)ERP:加法计算,与正常儿童比较,SDB组潜伏期明显延长[N1:(133.20±17.60)ms vs(86.40±19.76)ms;P2:(219.47±16.48)ms vs(185.73±23.84)ms;N2:(341.07±51.67)ms vs(297.60±24.18)ms],P2波幅降低[(6.75±4.56)μV vs(10.28±4.21)μV](P〈0.05);减法计算,与正常儿童比较,SDB组潜伏期明显延长[N1:(135.20±13.83)ms vs(88.27±16.95)ms;P2:(215.87±17.43)ms vs(189.07±19.45)ms;N2:(344.40±43.54)ms vs(308.27±47.77)ms,P〈0.05]。正确判断,SDB儿童潜伏期较正常对照组延长[N1:(130.27±14.28)ms vs(95.20±25.50)ms;P2:(231.07±21.06)ms vs(194.33±22.45)ms],P3波幅降低[(5.70±3.62)μV vs(11.29±7.30)μV](P〈0.05);错误判断,SDB儿童潜伏期较正常对照组延长[N1:(133.47±14.49)ms vs(90.13±21.85)ms;P2:(228.53±25.75)ms vs(187.33±19.81)ms;N2:344(318,360):291.07±26.52],P3波幅降低[(6.75±3.93)μV vs(10.85±6.05)μV](P〈0.05)。结论SDB儿童在计算和判断过程中,存在早期感知、编码障碍,不能启用正确的处理通路,反应速度慢,工作记忆、执行能力受损,Objective To study the features of impaired cognitive neural mechanism in children with sleep disordered breathing (SDB). Methods 15 SDB children and 15 normal children,with no signif- icant difference in the age and sex, performed mathematic tasks which include calculating and deciding. ERP was collected by BESA software. The differences of ERP components were compared and analysed. Results ( 1 ) The reaction time in children with SDB was longer than that in control group in addition and subtraction ( M ( P 25, P 75 ):1086. 83 ( 986. 17, 1393.45 ) ms vs 909.70 ( 833.35, 1117.82 ) ms, 1233.74 ( 1021.99, 1388.76 ) ms vs 967.88 ( 873.68,1137.32 ) ms, all P〈 0.05 ). ( 2 ) Fz in Mathematic ERP calculating : the P 1, P2, N2 latency (ms) in children with SDB was significantly longer than that in control group( (N1 : ( 133.20±17.60) vs (86.40±19.76) ;P2: (219.47± 16.48) vs ( 185.73±23.840; N2: (341.07±51.67) vs ( 297.60± 24.18) for addition;N1 : (135.20±13.83) vs (88.27±16.95) ; P2: (215.87±17.43) vs (189.07±19.45) ; N2: (344.40_±43.54) vs (308.27±47.77) for subtraction) ( all P〈0.05) .The P2 amplitudes(μV) for addition of children with SDB were lower than that of control group((6.75±4.56) vs (10.28±4.21) ) (P〈0.05). The N1, N2 latency (ms) for deciding in children with SDB was significantly longer than that of control group while in deciding right (NI:( 130.27± 14,28) vs (95.20±25.50) ;P2: (231.07±21.06) vs ( 194.33± 22.45 ) ) and the P3 amplitudes ( μV ) in children with SDB were significantly lower than that of control group( (5.70±3.62 vs (11.29±7.30) ) (all P〈0.05). The N1, P2, N2 latency (ms) in children with SDB was significantly longer than that of control group while in deciding error( N1 : ( 133.47± 14.49) vs ( 90.13± 21.85) ; P2: (228.53±25.75) vs ( 187.33±19.810; N2:344(31
分 类 号:R766[医药卫生—耳鼻咽喉科]
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...