Age does not necessarily influence latency of event-related potentials

M. Westermann; I. W. Husstedt; A. Okegwo; S. Evers

doi:10.1055/s-0038-1627735

Nervenheilkunde, Table of Contents

Nervenheilkunde 2014; 33(10): 723-727
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1627735

Originalarbeit

Schattauer GmbH

Age does not necessarily influence latency of event-related potentials

Alter beeinflusst nicht notwendigerweise die Latenzen von ereigniskorrelierten Potenzialen

M. Westermann

¹Department of Neurology, University of Münster

,

I. W. Husstedt

¹Department of Neurology, University of Münster

,

A. Okegwo

¹Department of Neurology, University of Münster

,

S. Evers

¹Department of Neurology, University of Münster

²Department of Neurology, Krankenhaus Lindenbrunn, Coppenbrügge

› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Summary

Event-related potentials (ERP) are regarded as age dependent. However, it is not known whether this is an intrinsic property of ERP or an extrinsic factor. We designed a setting in which ERP were evoked using a modified oddball paradigm with highly differentiable and detectable target and non-target stimuli. A total of 98 probands were enrolled in this study. We evaluated the latency and amplitude of the P3 component of visually evoked ERP. The mean P3 latency was 294 ± 28 ms and was not related to age (r = –0.089; p = 0.382; Spearman-rank-correlation). The P3 amplitude was related to age in the total sample (r = –0.323; p = 0.001; Spearmanrank-correlation) but not in the probands under the age of 60 years. There were no significant differences regarding sex. Our findings suggest that ERP are not age dependent if highly differentiable and detectable stimuli are used. This should be considered when normal values of ERP are created for clinical use.

Zusammenfassung

Bisher gelten ereigniskorrelierte Potenziale (EKP) als altersabhängig. Unbekannt ist jedoch, ob dieser Eigenschaft ein intrinsischer oder ein extrinsischer Faktor zugrunde liegt. Wir stellten eine Untersuchungsanordnung auf, in welcher EKP durch ein modifiziertes Oddball-Paradigma mit hoher Unterscheidbarkeit und Erkennbarkeit der Ziel- und Standardstimuli evoziert wurde. In unserer Studie wurden 98 Probanden untersucht. Wir werteten Latenzen und Amplituden der P3-Komponente der visuell evozierten EKP aus. Der Mittelwert der P3-Latenz betrug 294 ± 28 ms und war nicht altersabhängig (r = –0,089; p = 0,382; Spearman-rank-correlation). Die P3-Amplitude zeigte im Gesamtkollektiv eine Korrelation zum Alter (r = –0,323; p = 0,001; Spearman-rank-correlation), jedoch nicht für das Probandenkollektiv unter 60 Jahren. Es gab keine signifikanten Unterschiede bezogen auf das Geschlecht. Unsere Ergebnisse weisen darauf hin, dass EKP altersunabhängig sind, wenn hochgradig unterschiedliche und klar erkennbare Stimuli gewählt werden. Dies muss beachtet werden, wenn Normwerte der EKP für den klinischen Gebrauch erstellt werden.

Keywords

Event-related potentials - pattern reversal stimulation - oddball paradigm - sustained attention - age dependence

Schlüsselwörter

Ereigniskorrelierte Potenziale - Musterwechsel - Oddball-Paradigma - Daueraufmerksamkeit - Altersabhängigkeit

Full Text

References

References
1 Sutton S, Braren M, Zubin J, John RE. Evoked-potentials correlates of stimulus uncertainty. Science 1965; 150: 1187-1188.
2 Finley WF, Faux SF, Hutcheson J, Amstutz L. Longlatency event related potentials in the evaluation of cognitive function in children. Neurology 1985; 35: 323-327.
3 Goodin DS, Squires KC, Henderson BH, Starr A. Age-related variations in evoked potentials to auditory stimuli in normal human subjects. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1978; 44: 447-458.
4 Pfefferbaum A, Ford JM, Wenegrat BG, Roth WT, Koppell BS. Clinical application of the P300 component of event-related potentials. 2. Dementia, depression and schizophrenia. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1984b 59: 104-124.
5 Duncan CC, Mirsky AF, Lovelace CT, Theodore WH. Assessment of the attention impairment in absence epilepsy: comparison of visual and auditory P300. Int J Psychophysiol 2009; 73: 118-122.
6 Hömberg V, Hefter H, Granseyer G, Strauss W, Lange H, Hennerici M. Event related potentials in patients with Huntington´s disease and relatives at risk in relation to detailed psychometry. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1986; 63: 552-569.
7 Cohen SN, Syndulko K, Rever B, Kraut J, Coburn J, Tourtellotte WW. Visual evoked potentials and long latency event-related potentials in chronic renal failure. Neurology 1983; 33: 1219-1222.
8 Squires NK, Squires KC, Aine CJ. Event-related potentials assessment of sensory and cognitive deficits in mentally retarded. In: Lehmann D, Callaway E. (eds) Human evoked potentials: Applications and problems. Plenum; New York: 1979: 397-413.
9 Ollo CH, Johnson R, Grafman J. Signs of cognitive change in HIV disease: An event-related brain potential study. Neurology 1991; 41: 209-217.
10 Picton TW. et al. Guidelines for using human event-related potentials to study cognition: recording standards and publication criteria. Psychophysiology 2000; 37: 127-52.
11 Hoffman LD, Polich J. P300, handedness, and corpus callosal size: gender, modality, and task. Int J Psychophysiol 1999; 31: 163-174.
12 Picton TW, Stuss DT, Champagne SC, Nelson RF. The effects of age on human event-related potentials. Psychophysiology 1984; 21: 312-325.
13 Polich J, Howard L, Starr A. Effects of age on the P300 component of the event-related potential from auditory stimuli: Peak definition, variation and measurement. J Gerontol 1985; 40: 721-726.
14 Mullis RJ, Holcomb PJ, Diner BC, Dykman RA. The effect of aging on the P3 component of the visual event-related potential. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1985; 62: 141-149.
15 Goodin D, Desmedt J, Maurer K, Nuwer M. IFCN recommended standards for long-latency auditory event-related potentials. Report of on IFCN committee. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1994; 91: 18-20.
16 Fabiani M, Gratton G, Karis D, Donchin E. The definition, identifiction, and reliability of measurement of the P300 component of the event-related potential. In: Ackles PJ, Jennings JR, Coles MG. (eds.) Advances in psychophysiology. JAI Press; Greenwich: 1987: 1-78.
17 Magliero A, Bashore TR, Coles MGH, Donchin E. On the dependence of P300 latency on stimulus evaluation processes. Psychophysiology 1984; 21: 171-186.
18 Fagan jr JE, Westgate TM, Yolton RL. Effects of video display character size, clarity, and color on P300 latency. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1986; 63: 41-51.
19 Duncan-Johnson CC, Donchin E. On quantifying surprise: The variation of event-related potentials with subjective probability. Psychophysiology 1977; 14: 456-467.
20 Pfefferbaum A, Ford JM, Roth WT, Kopell BS. Age-related changes in auditory event-related potentials. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol Suppl 1980; 49: 266-276.
21 Yamaguchi S, Knight RT. Age effects on the P300 to novel somatosensory stimuli. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1991; 78: 297-301.
22 Pfefferbaum A, Ford JM, Wenegrat BG, Roth WT, Kopell BS. Clinical application of the P300 component of event-related potentials. 1. Normal aging. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1984a 59: 85-103.
23 Taghavy A, Kugler CF. Das visuelle P300 (PFP300) im physiologischen Alterungsprozess. Z EEG EMG 1988; 19: 10-13.
24 Grotemeyer KH, Brückner H, Rödding D, Husstedt IW, Evers S. Standardisation of optically evoked event related potentials and reaction time in children. Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol 1997; 103: 109.
25 Sangal RB, Sangal JM. Topography of auditory and visual P300 in normal adults. Clin Electroencephalogr 1996; 27: 145-150.
26 Evers S, Bauer B, Suhr B, Husstedt IW, Grotemeyer KH. Cognitive processing in primary headache: a study on event-related potentials. Neurology 1997; 48: 108-113.
27 Veiga H, Deslandes A, Cagy M, McDowell K, Pompeu F, Piedade R, Ribeiro P. Visual event-related potential (P300) – a normative study. Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria 2004; 62: 575-581.
28 Duncan CC. et al. Event-related potentials in clinical research: guidelines for eliciting, recording, and quantifying mismatch negativity, P300, and N400. Clinical Neurophysiology 2009; 120: 1883-1908.