Features of Interhemispheric Brain Interaction in Visual Working Memory of Military Man With Traumatic Brain Injury
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29038/2617-4723-2018-381-68-76Keywords:
visual working memory, EEG, coherent analysis, LORETA, traumatic brain injury, somatosensory cortexAbstract
Since verbal working memory is more safe with traumatic brain injuries (TBI) than visual working memory (VWM), the purpose of the study was to determine the features of interregional interaction in the brain of military men with TBI who took part in the operations in the east of Ukraine, after that – military men with TBI. This study conducted on 16 male volunteers, right-handers, at the age of 18–21 years, who have no problems with their health – students of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv (control group) and 16 male volunteers, right-handers, aged 27–43 – the patients of the Yu. I. Kundiyeva Institute for occupation health NAMS of Ukraine, Kyiv. During testing of VWM it was found that the reaction time in a military men group of with TBI was significantly higher than in the control group, although no significant differences were found between the relative numbers of errors. During VWM testing in the group of military men with TBI an interhemisphere relationship was detected in the somatosensory cortex, while in the control group a complicated fronto-parietal system of interhemisphere interactions was discovered. In the group of military men with TBI higher activity was detected not in the front-parietal system of top-down control of VWM, but in parietal and occipital zones. It should be noted that in the parietal-occipital network of VMW the bottom-up control processes more involved. It can be assumed that in the group of military men with TBI in the processes of visual memory the absence of complicated fronto-parietal system was compensated by more effective inclusion of cortical brain regions. This part of the brain is associated with the verbal processes of semantic analysis of visual information, which came mainly from its dorsal path. Instead of a higher level of control over coding, retention, and recovery of information from the frontal cortex as in control group, control of the processes of VWM may take the higher associative parietal cortex areas that are more based on the search for both new and already familiar stimulus by their features.
References
2. Schweizer, K.; Moosbrugger, H. Attention and working memory as predictors of intelligence. Intelligence; 2004, 32(4), pp 329–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2004.06.006
3. Fukuda, K. Quantity, not quality: the relationship between fluid intelligence and working memory capacity. Psychon Bull Rev; 2010, 17(5), pp 673–679. https://doi.org/10.3758/17.5.673
4. Wongupparaj, P.; Kumari, V.; Robin, G. The relation between a multicomponent working memory and intelligence: The roles of central executive and short-term storage functions. Intelligence; 2015, 53, pp 166–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2015.10.007
5. Brewin, C. R.; Beaton, A. Thought suppression, intelligence, and working memory capacity. Behaviour. Research and Therapy; 2002, 40, pp 923–930. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0005-7967(01)00127-9
6. Lauer, J. Neural correlates of visual memory in patients with diffuse axonal injury. Brain Injury; 2017, 31(11), pp 1513–1520. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699052.2017.1341998
7. David, N. K. Effects of severe traumatic brain injury on visual memory. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology; 2000, 22(1), pp 25–39.
8. Kulaichev, A. P. Ob informativnosti kogerentnogo analiza [On the Informative Value of Coherence Analysis]. ZHurnal vysshej nervnoj deyatel'nosti; 2009, 59, c 766–775. (in Russian)
9. Maia.; Pedro, D.; Kutz, J. N. Reaction time impairments in decision-making networks as a diagnostic marker for traumatic brain injuries and neurodegenerative diseases. ComputNeurosci; 2017, 42(3), pp 323–347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10827-017-0643-y
10. Schroeder, C.; Lakatos, P. Low-frequency neu-ronal oscillations as instruments of sensory selection. Trends in Neurosciences; 2009, 32(1), pp 9–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tins.2008.09.012
11. Bernat, E. Separating cognitive processes with principal components analysis of EEG time-frequency distributions; 2008, 70(74), pp 1–10.
12. Christophel, T. B. The distributed nature of working memory. Trends Cogn Sci; 2017, 21(2), pp 111–124.
13. Zanto, T. P. Causal role of the prefrontal cortex in top-down modulation of visual processing and working memory. Nat Neurosci; 2011, 14(5), pp 656–661. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.2773
14. Muhle-Karbe, P. S. Co-activation-based parcellation of the lateral prefrontal cortex delineates the inferior frontal junction area. Cereb Cortex; 2016, 26(5), pp 2225–2241. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhv073
15. Euston, D. R. The role of medial prefrontal cortex in memory and decision-making. Neuon; 2012, 76(6), pp 1057–1070. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2012.12.002
16. Domenech, P.; Koechlin, E. Executive control and decision-making in the prefrontal cortex. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences; 2015, 1, pp 101–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2014.10.007
17. Takahashi. Dissociation and convergence of the dorsal and ventral visual working memory streams in the human prefrontal cortex. NeuroImage; 2013, 65, pp 488–498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.10.002
18. Hampshire, A. The role of the right inferior frontal gyrus: inhibition and attentional control. Elsevier; 2010, 50, pp 1313–1319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.12.109
19. Kim, Y. K. Changes in network connectivity during motor imagery and execution. PLoSONE; 2018, 13(1), e0190715.
20. Perruchoud, D. Focal dystonia and the sensory-motor integrative loop for enacting (SMILE). Frontiers in human neuroscience; 2014, 8, pp 458–464. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00458
21. Avanzino, L. Sensory-motor integration in focal dystonia. Neuropsychologia; 2015, pp 288–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2015.07.008
22. Klimesch, W. What does phase information of oscillatory brain activity tell us about cognitive processes? Neuroscience; 2008, pp 344–361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2008.03.014
23. Sauseng, P. Fronto-parietal EEG coherence in theta and upper alpha reflect central executive functions of working memory. International Journal of Psychophysiology; 2005, 57, pp 97–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2005.03.018
24. Estera, M. K. Theta–gamma coupling during episodic retrieval in the human EEG. Brain research; 2014, 15(77), pp 57–68.
25. Daume, J. Phase-amplitude coupling and long-range phase synchronization reveal frontotemporal interactions during visual working memory. The Journal of neuroscience: the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience; 2016, 37(2), pp 313–322. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.2130-16.2016
26. Park, H. Blocking of irrelevant memories by posterior alpha activity boosts memory encoding. Hum Brain Mapp; 2014, 35, pp 3972–3987. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.22452
27. Klimesch, W.; Sausend, P.; Hanslmayr, S. EEG alpha oscillations: The inhibition–timing hypothesis. Elsevier; 2007, 53, pp 63–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainresrev.2006.06.003
28. Ranganath, C.; D'Esposito, M. Directing the mind's eye: Рrefrontal, inferior and medial temporal mechanisms for visual working memory; 2005, 15(2), pp 175–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2005.03.017
29. Sauseng, P. Control mechanisms in working memory: a possible function of EEG theta oscillations. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews; 2010, 34, pp 1015–1022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2009.12.006
30. Shumskaya, E. Abnormal connectivity in the sensorimotor network predicts attention deficits in traumatic brain injury; 2017, 235(3), pp 799–807. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-016-4841-z
31. Rigon, A. Is traumatic brain injury associated with reduced inter-hemispheric functional connectivity? A study of large-scale resting state networks following. Traumatic Brain Injury. Journal of neurotrauma; 2016, 33, pp 977–989.
https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2014.3847
32. O'Neil, T. G. Applications of resting state functional mr imaging to traumatic brain injury. Neuroimaging Clin N A; 2017, 27(4) pp 685–696.
33. Woodman, G. F.; Vecera, S. P.; Luck, S. J. Perceptual organization influences visual working memory. Psychon Bull Rev; 2003, 10(1), pp 80–87. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03196470
34. Slotnick, S. D.; Schacter, D. L. The nature of memory related activity in early visual areas. Neuropsychologia; 2006, 44(14), pp 2874–2886. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.06.021
35. Ernst, M.; Pauius, M. P.Choiceselection and reward anticipation: an fMRI study. Neuropsychologia; 2005, 42, pp 1585–1597.
36. Gerlacha, C. Law Brain activity related to integrative processes in visual object recognition: bottom-up integration and the modulatory influence of stored knowledge. Neuropsychologia; 2002, 40, pp 1254–1267. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0028-3932(01)00222-6
37. Chou, T. L. Developmental and skill effects on the neural correlates of semantic processing to visually presented words. Human brain mapping; 2006, 27(11), pp 915–924. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.20231
38. Adrian, W. A parietal memory network revealed by multiple MRI methods. Trends in Cognitive Sciences; 2015, 19(9), pp 534–543. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2015.07.004
39. Alers, A. M. Shared representations for working memory and mental imagery in early visual cortex. Current Biology; 2013, 23(15), pp 1427–1431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2013.05.065
40. Prabhakaran, V. Integration of diverse information in working memory within the frontal lobe. Nat Neurosci; 2000, 3(1), pp 85–90. https://doi.org/10.1038/71156
