SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Implication of EEG theta/alpha and theta/beta ratio in Alzheimer's and Lewy body disease.

Sci Rep · 2022-11-04

DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-21951-5PMID: 36333386

Open accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; research-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

We evaluated the patterns of quantitative electroencephalography (EEG) in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD), Lewy body disease (LBD), and mixed disease. Sixteen patients with AD, 38 with LBD, 20 with mixed disease, and 17 control participants were recruited and underwent EEG. The theta/alpha ratio and theta/beta ratio were measured. The relationship of the log-transformed theta/alpha ratio (TAR) and theta/beta ratio (TBR) with the disease group, the presence of AD and LBD, and clinical symptoms were evaluated. Participants in the LBD and mixed disease groups had higher TBR in all lobes except for occipital lobe than those in the control group. The presence of LBD was independently associated with higher TBR in all lobes and higher central and parietal TAR, while the presence of AD was not. Among cognitively impaired patients, higher TAR was associated with the language, memory, and visuospatial dysfunction, while higher TBR was associated with the memory and frontal/executive dysfunction. Increased TBR in all lobar regions and temporal TAR were associated with the hallucinations, while cognitive fluctuations and the severity of Parkinsonism were not. Increased TBR could be a biomarker for LBD, independent of AD, while the presence of mixed disease could be reflected as increased TAR.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.