4.2 Article

Gender dimorphism of brain reward system volumes in alcoholism

期刊

PSYCHIATRY RESEARCH-NEUROIMAGING
卷 263, 期 -, 页码 15-25

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pscychresns.2017.03.001

关键词

Alcohol; Abstinence; MRI; Sex; Reward network; Brain morphometry; Drinking history

资金

  1. National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) [R01-AA07112, K05-AA00219]
  2. US Department of Veterans Affairs Clinical Science Research and Development [I01-CX000326]
  3. National Institute on Aging (NIA)
  4. National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) [R01-AG042512]
  5. National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH) [R21-AT008865]
  6. National Center for Research Resources [P41RR14075]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The brain's reward network has been reported to be smaller in alcoholic men compared to nonalcoholic men, but little is known about the volumes of reward regions in alcoholic women. Morphometric analyses were performed on magnetic resonance brain scans of 60 long-term chronic alcoholics (ALC; 30 men) and 60 nonalcoholic controls (NC; 29 men). We derived volumes of total brain, and cortical and subcortical reward-related structures including the dorsolateral prefrontal (DLPFC), orbitofrontal, and cingulate cortices, and the temporal pole, insula, amygdala, hippocampus, nucleus accumbens septi (NAc), and ventral diencephalon (VDC). We examined the relationships of the volumetric findings to drinking history. Analyses revealed a significant gender interaction for the association between alcoholism and total reward network volumes, with ALC men having smaller reward volumes than NC men and ALC women having larger reward volumes than NC women. Analyses of a priori subregions revealed a similar pattern of reward volume differences with significant gender interactions for DLPFC and VDC. Overall, the volume of the cerebral ventricles in ALC participants was negatively associated with duration of abstinence, suggesting decline in atrophy with greater length of sobriety.

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

4.2
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