A neurophysiological profile associated with impulse control disorders in Parkinson’s disease [Póster]

A neurophysiological profile associated with Impulse Control Disorders in Parkinson’s disease. Iglesias Camacho E, Martín-Rodríguez JF, Santiago García-Rayo I, Garrote Espina L, Álvarez de Toledo P, Franco Rosado P, Jesús S, Muñoz Delgado L, Macías-García D, Adarmes-Gómez A, Carrillo F, Mir P. METHODS. We included 36 participants divided into three groups: healthy controls (HC) (n=12), patients with PD and ICDs (PD+ICDs) (n=12)and patients with PD without ICDs (PD-ICDs) (n=12). Resting state EEG was collected from the 3 groups.PD patients underwent two recording sessions, one under their regular dopaminergic treatment (ON) and another after an overnight washout of their usual dopamine replacement therapy (OFF). Independent component analysis was used for blind source separation and spectral decomposition focused our analysis on the study of differences in three variables: θand β, and the θ/β ratio. Correlation analysis of clinical features and demographic information with the EEG variables was also conducted. Source localizations of these three measures of interest were estimated with low resolution brain electromagnetic tomography (sLORETA). OBJECTIVE. To get new insights into the role of oscillatory brain activity recorded non-invasively in patients with Parkinson’s disease (PD) and impulse control disorders (ICDs). BACKGROUND. ICDs is commonly associated with dopaminergic agonist (DA) treatment and trait impulsivity. Other psychiatric and neurological disorders related with impulsivity has shown alterations in brain oscillations (cortical θand β, and the θ/ βratio). In these disorders, βoscillations is correlated with ICD severity and an increased θ/ βratio is associated with higher risk-taking behaviours. RESULTS. Increased θpower in the central region was observed in PD+ICDs patients in the OFF condition compared to HC (p=0.005) (Figure 1). These patients also showed decreased central θactivity (p= 0.007) and θ/β ratio (p=0.023), as well as increased central-parietal βactivity (p=0.036) when they were in ON compared to OFF condition (Figure 2). Trait impulsivity correlated with frontal θ/β ratio (p=0.006) in ON condition PD+ICDs, and with frontal (p=0.026) and parietal θ/β (p=0.039) in OFF condition PD-ICDs (Figure 3). We detected differences in central θbetween PD+ICDs in OFF and HC in frontal regions; and in PD+ICDs ON and OFF condition (Figure 4). Also in cerebral sources location, parietal sources of βoscillations showed a treatment effect in the PD+ICDs group with increased βactivity (Figure 4). Figure 1. Topographical distribution for central θactivity in HC and PD+ICD in OFF. A) HC and B) PD+ICDs in OFF. CONCLUSIONS. PD+ICDs patients show a distinctive neurophysiological profile compared to patients with ICD and this profile is sensitive to dopaminergic treatment. The profile found correlates with trait impulsivity and shares similarities with other disorders with high trait impulsivity. A) B) Figure 2. Diferrences in θ, β, and the θ/β ratio between PD+ICD in OFF and ON condition. Topographical distribution of EEG power for θ, β, θ/β in PD+ICDs in OFF (A) and PD+ICDs in ON (B). A) θθ /ββ B) Figure 4. Cerebral sources location. Frontal sources in θfor detected differences between HC and PD+ICDs in OFF (A); frontal sources in θfor detected differences between and PD+ICDs in OFF and ON (B) and parietal sources for increased βactivity in PD+ICDs ON (C). A) B) C) Figure 3. Correlation between oscilations and Impulsivity (BIS11). Correlation in PD-ICDs OFF for frontal (A) and parietal θ/β (B). Corelation in PD+ICDs ON for frontal θ/β (C). θ/β Fz A) θ/β Pz B) C) θ/β Fz