Relative sparing of item recognition memory in a patient with adult-onset damage limited to the hippocampus
Relative sparing of item recognition memory in a patient with adult-onset damage limited to the hippocampus
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/hipo.1111
复制
发表时间：
2002-01-01
期刊：
影响因子：
3.5
通讯作者：
Roberts, N
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Mayes, AR;Holdstock, JS;Roberts, N
关于人类选择性海马损伤是否会导致清晰的物品识别和回忆缺陷，目前还存在分歧。Reed和Squire （Behav Neurosci 1997;111:667-775）发现成人发病的相对选择性海马损伤患者存在明显的项目识别缺陷，而varghaa - khadem等人（Science 1997;277: 376-380; Soc Neurosci abstract 1998;24:1523）发现3名儿童早期遭受选择性海马损伤的患者存在明显的回忆缺陷，但项目识别相对正常。然而，Manns和Squire（海马1999；9:49 95-499）认为，这些患者的项目识别能力可能没有受到影响，因为他们的病理早期发病允许代偿机制的发展。因此，为了确定早期病变是否对项目识别的相对保留至关重要，并确定其发生是否受到任务因素的影响，我们广泛检查了患者y.r.的项目识别，他的病理局限于海马。与发展性案例一样，她在34项测试中表现出明显的自由回忆缺陷，但在43项测试中，她的物品识别能力相对完好，而且明显比她的回忆能力受到的干扰要小。她的项目识别性能相对于她的对照组没有显著影响测试是否使用视觉或口头材料，是否有是/否或强制选择格式，包含很少或许多项目，每个目标项目有一个或几个箔，使用短或很长的延迟，或者对正常受试者来说是困难还是容易。有趣的是，在Manns和Squire的3例患者中，YR的双侧海马破坏程度至少大于2例（海马1999；9:49 95-499）。讨论了为什么在成人发病的相对选择性海马损伤患者之间的项目识别不同的可能原因，以及如何最好地确定真正关键的原因。
There is disagreement about whether selective hippocampal lesions in humans cause clear item recognition as well as recall deficits. Whereas Reed and Squire (Behav Neurosci 1997;111:667-775) found that patients with adult-onset relatively selective hippocampal lesions showed clear item recognition deficits, Vargha-Khadem et al. (Science 1997;277: 376-380, Soc Neurosci Abstr 1998;24:1523) found that 3 patients who suffered selective hippocampal damage in early childhood showed clear recall deficits, but had relatively normal item recognition. Manns and Squire (Hippocampus 1999;9:495-499) argued, however, that item recognition may have been spared in these patients because the early onset of their pathology allowed compensatory mechanisms to develop. Therefore, to determine whether early lesion onset is critical for the relative sparing of item recognition and to determine whether its occurrence is influenced by task factors, we extensively examined item recognition in patient Y.R., who has pathology of adult-onset restricted to the hippocampus. Like the developmental cases, she showed clear free recall deficits on 34 tests, but her item recognition on 43 tests was relatively spared, and markedly less disrupted than her recall. Her item recognition performance relative to that of her controls was not significantly influenced by whether tests tapped visual or verbal materials, had a yes/no or forced-choice format, contained few or many items, had one or several foils per target item, used short or very long delays, or were difficult or easy for normal subjects. Interestingly, YR's bilateral hippocampal destruction was greater than at least 2 of the 3 patients of Manns and Squire (Hippocampus 1999;9:495-499). The possible reasons why item recognition differs across patients with relatively selective hippocampal damage of adult-onset and how the reasons that are truly critical can be best identified are discussed.