Paměťová rezerva a údržba paměti u superúspěšně stárnoucích osmdesátníků
Authors:
M. Kopeček 1,2; R. Heissler 1; Z. Tichá 3; H. Georgi 3
Authors‘ workplace:
National Institute of Mental Health, Klecany, Czech Republic
1; Department of Psychiatry and Medical Psychology, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
2; Prague College of Psychosocial Studies, Prague, Czech Republic
3
Published in:
Cesk Slov Neurol N 2023; 86(6): 391-396
Category:
Original Paper
doi:
https://doi.org/10.48095/cccsnn2023391
Overview
Cíl: Dospělí ve věku 80 let a více s epizodickou pamětí jako průměrný šedesátník jsou nazýváni paměťově superúspěšně stárnoucími jedinci (PSÚSJ). Cílem práce je zjistit, zda PSÚSJ mají vyšší paměťovou rezervu nebo stabilnější paměťovou údržbu. Soubor a metodika: Analyzovali jsme kognitivní výkonnost u 46 kognitivně zdravých starších dospělých během 6 let ve 3 časových bodech (T1, T2 a T3). Všichni účastníci měli 80 a více let a měli normální kognitivní výkon v T3. PSÚSJ byli definování výkonem ve spontánním oddáleném vybavení z paměti ve Filadelfském testu učení a paměti (LDFR-PVLT) ≥ devět slov (průměr zdravých osob ve věku 60–64 let) v T3. Logická paměť a PVLT suma pokusů 1–5 byly porovnávány mezi i v rámci skupin. Výsledky: V souboru bylo 20 PSÚSJ (16 žen) a 26 ne-PSÚSJ (11 žen) v T3, což znamená, že více PSÚSJ bylo mezi ženami než muži. V T3 nebyly zjištěny významné rozdíly mezi skupinami ve věku, vzdělání, depresivní symptomatice. PSÚSJ měli významně vyšší PVLT 1–5, ale nikoliv logickou paměť v T1. Jejich kognitivní rezerva byla vyšší pro verbální učení, nikoliv pro logickou paměť ve srovnání s ne-PSÚSJ. U PSÚSJ došlo během 6 let ke zlepšení v PVLT 1–5 ale nikoliv v logické paměti. Závěr: Naše výsledky naznačují, že paměťová rezerva i paměťová údržba hrají roli u PSÚSJ. Rozdíl mezi skupinami byl dán rozdílným učením nikoliv logickou pamětí. PSÚSJ jsou více mezi ženami než muži.
Klíčová slova:
paměť – stárnutí – kognitivní údržba – kognitivní rezerva – odolnost
Sources
1. Kaup AR, Nettiksimmons J, Harris TB et al. Cognitive resilience to apolipoprotein E epsilon4: contributing factors in black and white older adults. JAMA Neurol 2015; 72 (3): 340–348. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2014.3978.
2. Arenaza-Urquijo EM, Przybelski SA, Lesnick TL et al. The metabolic brain signature of cognitive resilience in the 80+: beyond Alzheimer pathologies. Brain 2019; 142 (4): 1134–1147. doi: 10.1093/brain/awz037.
3. de Godoy LL, Alves C, Saavedra JSM et al. Understanding brain resilience in superagers: a systematic review. Neuroradiology 2021; 63 (5): 663–683. doi: 10.1007/ s00234-020-02562-1.
4. Nyberg L, Pudas S. Successful memory aging. Annu Rev Psychol 2019; 70: 219–243. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-103052.
5. Harrison TM, Weintraub S, Mesulam MM et al. Superior memory and higher cortical volumes in unusually successful cognitive aging. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 2012; 18 (6): 1081–1085. doi: 10.1017/S1355617712000847.
6. Rogalski EJ, Gefen T, Shi J et al. Youthful memory capacity in old brains: anatomic and genetic clues from the Northwestern SuperAging Project. J Cogn Neurosci 2013; 25 (1): 29–36. doi: 10.1162/jocn_a_00300.
7. Gefen T, Peterson M, Papastefan ST et al. Morphometric and histologic substrates of cingulate integrity in elders with exceptional memory capacity. J Neurosci 2015; 35 (4): 1781–1791. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2998-14. 2015.
8. Sun FW, Stepanovic MR, Andreano J et al. Youthful brains in older adults: preserved neuroanatomy in the default mode and salience networks contributes to youthful memory in superaging. J Neurosci 2016; 36 (37): 9659–9668. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1492-16.2016.
9. Dekhtyar M, Papp KV, Buckley et al. Neuroimaging markers associated with maintenance of optimal memory performance in late-life. Neuropsychologia 2017; 100: 164–170. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2017.04. 037.
10. Harrison TM, Maass A, Baker SL et al. Brain morphology, cognition, and beta-amyloid in older adults with superior memory performance. Neurobiol Aging 2018; 67: 162–170. doi: 10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2018.03.024.
11. Gardener SL, Weinborn M, Sohrabi HR et al. Longitudinal trajectories in cortical thickness and volume atrophy: superior cognitive performance does not protect against brain atrophy in older adults. J Alzheimers Dis 2021; 81 (3): 1039–1052. doi: 10.3233/JAD-201243.
12. Stern Y. Cognitive reserve. Neuropsychologia 2009; 47 (10): 2015–2028. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009. 03.004.
13. Nyberg L, Lovden M, Riklund K et al. Memory aging and brain maintenance. Trends Cogn Sci 2012; 16 (5): 292–305. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2012.04.005.
14. Cabeza R, Albert M, Belleville S et al. Maintenance, reserve and compensation: the cognitive neuroscience of healthy ageing. Nat Rev Neurosci 2018; 19 (11): 701–710. doi: 10.1038/s41583-018-0068-2.
15. Lindenberger U, Burzynska AZ. Nagel IE heterogeneity in frontal lobe aging. In: Stuss DT, Knight RT (eds). Principles of frontal lobe function. Oxford: Oxford University Press 2013: 609–627.
16. Kremen WS, Elman JA, Panizzon MS et al. Cognitive reserve and related constructs: a unified framework across cognitive and brain dimensions of aging. Front Aging Neurosci 2022; 14: 834765. doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2022.834765.
17. Pudas S, Persson J, Josefsson M et al. Brain characteristics of individuals resisting age-related cognitive decline over two decades. J Neurosci 2013; 33 (20): 8668–8677. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2900-12.2013.
18. Dixon RA, de Frias CM. Cognitively elite, cognitively normal, and cognitively impaired aging: neurocognitive status and stability moderate memory performance. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 2014; 36 (4): 418–430. doi: 10.1080/13803395.2014.903901.
19. Dekhtyar M, Papp KV, Buckley R et al. Neuroimaging markers associated with maintenance of optimal memory performance in late-life. Neuropsychologia 2017; 100: 164–170. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2017.04. 037.
20. de Frias CM, Dixon RA, Strauss E. Characterizing executive functioning in older special populations: from cognitively elite to cognitively impaired. Neuropsychology 2009; 23 (6): 778–791. doi: 10.1037/a0016743.
21. Štěpánková H, Bezdíček O, Nikolai T et al. National normative study of cognitive determinants of healthy ageing – status report. E-psychologie 2015; 9 (1): 43–64.
22. Štěpánková H, Nikolai T, Lukavský J et al. Mini-mental state examination – Czech normative study. Cesk Slov Neurol N 2015; 78/111 (1): 57–63.
23. Bezdicek O, Libon DJ, Stepankova H et al. Development, validity, and normative data study for the 12-word Philadelphia Verbal Learning Test [czP (r) VLT-12] among older and very old Czech adults. Clin Neuropsychol 2014; 28 (7): 1162–1181. doi: 10.1080/13854046.2014.952666.
24. Bezdicek O, Stepankova H, Axelrod BN et al. Clinimetric validity of the Trail Making Test Czech version in Parkinson’s disease and normative data for older adults. Clin Neuropsychol 2017; 31 (Suppl 1): 42–60. doi: 10.1080/13854046.2017.1324045.
25. Kaplan EF, Goodglass H, Weintraub S. The Boston naming test. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger 1983.
26. Bezdicek O, Rosicka AM, Mana J et al. The 30-item and 15-item Boston naming test Czech version: item response analysis and normative values for healthy older adults. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 2021; 43 (9): 890–905. doi: 10.1080/13803395.2022.2029360.
27. Morris JC, Heyman A, Mohs RC et al. The Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer’s Disease (CERAD). Part I. Clinical and neuropsychological assessment of Alzheimer’s disease. Neurology 1989; 39 (9): 1159–1165. doi: 10.1212/wnl.39.9.1159.
28. Nikolai T, Štěpánková H, Michalec J et al. Verbal fluency tests – Czech normative study for older persons. Cesk Slov Neurol N 2015; 78/111 (3): 292–299. doi: 10.14735/amcsnn2015292.
29. Nikolai T, Stepankova H, Kopecek M et al. The uniform data set, Czech version: normative data in older adults from an international perspective. J Alzheimers Dis 2018; 61 (3): 1233–1240. doi: 10.3233/JAD-170595.
30. Jenčová A, Černochová D. WMS-IIIa – Wechslerova zkrácená paměťová škála. Prague: Hogrefe – Testcentrum 2011.
31. Wechsler D. Wechsler memory scale – third edition abbreviated manual. USA: The Psychological Corporation 2002.
32. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. “Mini- -mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 1975; 12 (3): 189–198. doi: 10.1016/0022-3956 (75) 900 26-6.
33. Sheikh JI, Yesavage JA. Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS): recent evidence and development of a shorter version. Clin Gerontol 1986; 5 (1–2): 165–173. doi: 10.1300/J018v05n01_09.
34. Heissler R, Červenková M, Kopeček M et al. Geriatric depression scale (GDS-15): Czech normative study. Ceskslov Psychol 2020; 64 (1): 49–65.
35. Pfeffer RI, Kurosaki TT, Harrah CH et al. Measurement of functional activities in older adults in the community. J Gerontol 1982; 37 (3): 323–329. doi: 10.1093/geronj/37.3.323.
36. Bezdicek O, Stepankova H, Martinec Novakova L et al. Toward the processing speed theory of activities of daily living in healthy aging: normative data of the Functional Activities Questionnaire. Aging Clin Exp Res 2016; 28 (2): 239–247. doi: 10.1007/s40520-015-0413-5.
37. Maccora J, Peters R, Anstey KJ. Gender differences in superior-memory superagers and associated factors in an Australian cohort. J Appl Gerontol 2021; 40 (4): 433–442. doi: 10.1177/0733464820902943.
38. Kramer JH, Delis DC, Daniel MH. Sex differences in verbal learning. J Clin Psychol 1988; 44 (6): 907–915. doi: 10.1002/1097-4679 (198811) 44: 6<907:: AID-JCLP2270440610>3.0.CO; 2-8.
39. Aartsen MJ, Martin M, Zimprich D et al. Gender differences in level and change in cognitive functioning. Results from the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam. Gerontology 2004; 50 (1): 35–38. doi: 10.1159/000074387.
40. Pauls F, Petermann F, Lepach AC. Gender differences in episodic memory and visual working memory including the effects of age. Memory 2013; 21 (7): 857–874. doi: 10.1080/09658211.2013.765892.
41. Sundermann EE, Biegon A, Rubin LH et al. Better verbal memory in women than men in MCI despite similar levels of hippocampal atrophy. Neurology 2016; 86 (15): 1368–1376. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000002570.
42. Stern Y, Albert M, Barnes CA et al. A framework for concepts of reserve and resilience in aging. Neurobiol Aging 2023; 124: 100–103. doi: 10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2022. 10.015.
Labels
Paediatric neurology Neurosurgery NeurologyArticle was published in
Czech and Slovak Neurology and Neurosurgery
2023 Issue 6
Most read in this issue
- Diffuse glioma overview based on the 2021 WHO classification part 1 – adult type
- The effects of introducing psychoeducational programs in patients with stroke in post-acute care
- Memory reserve and memory maintenance in SuperAgers
- Surgical treatment of intracranial aneurysm recurrence after clipping