Cross-sectional field study comparing hippocampal subfields in patients with post-traumatic stress disorder, major depressive disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder with comorbid major depressive disorder, and adjustment disorder using routine clinical data

Abstract

BackgroundThe hippocampus is a central brain structure involved in stress processing. Previous studies have linked stress-related mental disorders, such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and major depressive disorder (MDD), with changes in hippocampus volume. As PTSD and MDD have similar symptoms, clinical diagnosis relies solely on patients reporting their cognitive and emotional experiences, leading to an interest in utilizing imaging-based data to improve accuracy. Our field study aimed to determine whether there are hippocampal subfield volume differences between stress-related mental disorders (PTSD, MDD, adjustment disorders, and AdjD) using routine clinical data from a military hospital.MethodsParticipants comprised soldiers (N = 185) with PTSD (n = 50), MDD (n = 70), PTSD with comorbid MDD (n = 38), and AdjD (n = 27). The hippocampus was segmented and volumetrized into subfields automatically using FreeSurfer. We used ANCOVA models with estimated total intracranial volume as a covariate to determine whether there were volume differences in the hippocampal subfields cornu ammonis 1 (CA1), cornu ammonis 2/3 (CA2/3), and dentate gyrus (DG) among patients with PTSD, MDD, PTSD with comorbid MDD, and AdjD. Furthermore, we added self-reported symptom duration and previous psychopharmacological and psychotherapy treatment as further covariates to examine whether there were associations with CA1, CA2/3, and DG.ResultsNo significant volume differences in hippocampal subfields between stress-related mental disorders were found. No significant associations were detected between symptom duration, psychopharmacological treatment, psychotherapy, and the hippocampal subfields.ConclusionHippocampal subfields may distinguish stress-related mental disorders; however, we did not observe any subfield differences. We provide several explanations for the non-results and thereby inform future field studies.