PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Tilman Schulte

Publications and source records attributed to Tilman Schulte.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Differential effect of HIV infection and alcoholism on conflict processing, attentional allocation, and perceptual load: evidence from a Stroop Match-to-Sample task.

BACKGROUND: Alcoholism and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection each can impair components of selective attention, probably through disruption of the integrity of the frontoparietal neural systems that underlie conflict processing, attentional allocation, and perceptual load. METHODS: We studied 18 patients with alcoholism (ALC) alone, 19 with HIV infection alone (HIV), 20 with both disorders (H+A), and 19 healthy control subjects (CTL). We used a novel paradigm (Stroop Match-to-Sample tasks), in which subjects saw either a valid or invalid color cue before a target word, printed in a color that was either congruent or incongruent with the word's meaning. RESULTS: All groups showed a significant Stroop effect, cue-target color Match effect, and interaction between Match and Stroop, with an exaggerated Stroop effect for the Match condition. The HIV patients were comparable to CTL, whereas ALC showed mild delays, with further delays associated with comorbidity with HIV. Although H+A profited from a valid match to Stroop stimuli, they were compromised in disengaging attention from the invalidly cued color. CONCLUSIONS: Impairment in conflict processing and attentional allocation in alcoholism suggests disruption of frontal-parietal attentional systems. Although HIV alone did not demonstrate detectable impairment in performance, HIV conferred liability on attentional processes when combined with alcohol abuse.

Adult↗

No significant effect of acute moderate alcohol intake on leptin levels in healthy male volunteers.

As, for ethical reasons, it is difficult to investigate by an experiment the effect of acute intoxication on leptin levels in alcoholics, we tested the hypothesis of lowered levels as an effect of acute ethanol intake in healthy volunteers. The subjects comprised (1) 17 healthy male participants, recruited via newspaper advertisements [age 29+/-3.75 years, body mass index (BMI) 24.3+/-3.5, leptin at baseline 3.3+/-3.1 ng/ml]; (2) for comparison, leptin levels of 16 male alcoholic patients at day 1 of withdrawal were used. They were characterized as follows: (mean, median, standard deviation and range) age in years (41.1, 40.5, 10.2, 24, 57), BMI (23.3, 21.7, 5.4, 16.6, 37.5), 1,032 g of ethanol (median) consumed within the last 7 days, leptin levels 2.3 mg/ml. A placebo-controlled double-blind trial was performed. Leptin levels of blood samples were taken at baseline (t(1)), before ethanol intake (t(2)), when blood alcohol had reached its maximum (t(3)) and the morning after (t(4)). The oral dose of ethanol administered was 0.6 g/kg ethanol. (1) VOLUNTEERS: (a) the ethanol and placebo group exhibited leptin levels corresponding closely with levels measured at baseline (t(1)) (rs=0.85, p<0.0001) and follow-up (t(4)) (rs=0.768, p<0.0001). (b) Leptin levels for the placebo and the alcohol-consuming (verum) group did not differ significantly at baseline, after ethanol intake or on the morning after [Mann-Whitney U-test (p=0.669, p=1.0 and p=0.887, respectively)]. (2) Leptin levels in relation to BMI did not significantly differ at any measurement time in either group. (3) Leptin levels/BMI of the healthy volunteers at t(1) and t(4) were not significantly different from those of 16 alcoholics. The data do not support the hypothesis of a significant effect of acute moderate alcohol intake on leptin levels in healthy volunteers.

Adult↗

Neglect and hemianopia superimposed.

In patients with posterior-parietal brain damage it is often difficult to decide whether left-sided omissions in perimetry are due to primary visual loss or due to visual neglect. We investigated 11 patients with combined neglect/hemianopia and 11 patients with pure hemianopia using a visual search task with single or double stimulation conditions. The second stimulus was either the fixation point itself (like in perimetry) or a distractor appearing in the hemifield opposite to the target. The fixation point did not worsen left-sided perception, but its disappearance led to a bias of exploration towards the right side in neglect patients but not in pure hemianopics. A distractor in the intact hemifield worsened the performance to left-sided stimuli, that is, neglect patients behaved as if they were completely hemianopic, even in intact parts of the visual field (VF). Three of the neglect patients showed unconscious processing of the distractor in the left VF, suggesting that the visual field defect was produced by neglect mechanisms rather than primary visual loss. This visual search paradigm appears to be helpful in understanding of the nature of hemianopia versus neglect deficits in individual patients.

Adult↗