» Articles » PMID: 37818143

The Effects of Sexual Abuse on Female Adolescent Brain Structures

Overview
Publisher Sciendo
Specialty Pediatrics
Date 2023 Oct 11
PMID 37818143
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: Sexual abuse (SA) is known for its effects on brain structures in adolescents. We aimed to explore if SA has any effect on limbic and prefrontal cortex (PFC) structures. We hypothesized that children with SA would have a thinner PFC with larger amygdala and hippocampus that lead to aberrations in threat detection, orientation and response circuit; that would be highly adaptive in a dangerous environment in the short term.

Method: We included 57 SA and 33 healthy control (HC) female participants. In addition to psychiatric evaluation, we acquired 3 T MR images from all participants. We compared prefrontal cortical thicknesses, hippocampus and amygdala volumes between groups.

Results: The age and education levels of study groups were matched, however, IQ scores and socioeconomic status (SES) scores of the SA group were lower than the controls. Total CTQ scores of the SA group were higher than the HC. Nevertheless, the mean value of sexual abuse scores was above the cut-off scores only for the SA participants. SA participants had larger right and left hippocampus and right amygdala volumes than the controls. SA group had reduced inferior frontal gyrus cortical thickness (T=3.5, p<0.01, cluster size=694 mm2, x=51 y=-30 z=6) than HC group. None of the structural findings were correlated with total or sexual abuse CTQ scores.

Conclusion: Children with SA history has structural abnormalities in threat detection, orientation and response circuit. SA victims with no psychiatric diagnosis have a high probability of psychiatric problems with a possible contribution of these aberrations. SA cases that do not have a diagnosis must not be overlooked as they may have structural changes in emotion related brain regions. Careful follow-up is needed for all of all SA cases.

References
1.
Walsh N, Dalgleish T, Lombardo M, Dunn V, van Harmelen A, Ban M . General and specific effects of early-life psychosocial adversities on adolescent grey matter volume. Neuroimage Clin. 2014; 4:308-18. PMC: 4107373. DOI: 10.1016/j.nicl.2014.01.001. View

2.
Taylor R, Cooper S, Jackson J, Barch D . Assessment of Neighborhood Poverty, Cognitive Function, and Prefrontal and Hippocampal Volumes in Children. JAMA Netw Open. 2020; 3(11):e2023774. PMC: 7610187. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.23774. View

3.
Bomyea J, Simmons A, Shenton M, Coleman M, Bouix S, Rathi Y . Neurocognitive markers of childhood abuse in individuals with PTSD: Findings from the INTRuST Clinical Consortium. J Psychiatr Res. 2019; 121:108-117. PMC: 7568209. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2019.11.012. View

4.
Miller G, Chen E, Parker K . Psychological stress in childhood and susceptibility to the chronic diseases of aging: moving toward a model of behavioral and biological mechanisms. Psychol Bull. 2011; 137(6):959-97. PMC: 3202072. DOI: 10.1037/a0024768. View

5.
Barch D, Belden A, Tillman R, Whalen D, Luby J . Early Childhood Adverse Experiences, Inferior Frontal Gyrus Connectivity, and the Trajectory of Externalizing Psychopathology. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2018; 57(3):183-190. PMC: 5836492. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaac.2017.12.011. View