Persistent neurocognitive deficits in cognitively impaired survivors of sepsis are explained by reductions in working memory capacity.

Sepsis is defined as life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated host response to infection. Mounting evidence suggests that many cognitively impaired sepsis survivors show long-term neurocognitive deficits in neuropsychological tasks. To date, the underlying mechanisms of these deficits are insufficiently understood. Based on previous evaluations we hypothesized that visual attention and working memory may be affected in a sample of cognitively impaired sepsis survivors. We utilized psychophysical whole-and partial-report paradigms based on the computational theory of visual attention (TVA) to determine (i) whether sepsis survivors show changes in basic parameters of visual attention and working memory, (ii) whether the affected parameters are related to neuropsychological test results in a standard battery in sepsis survivors and matched healthy control participants, (iii) whether between-group differences in these basic parameters of visual attention could account for underperformance of sepsis survivors in neuropsychological tests when adjusting for potentially relevant clinical variables. We showed that, in sepsis survivors, the maximum number of elements consciously maintained in an instant, i.e. the working memory storage capacity Thus, in our sample of cognitively impaired sepsis survivors, a reduction in working memory capacity seems to be a critical determinant of the neurocognitive sequelae. It should be the subject of future work on mechanisms but may also serve as surrogate outcome measure in interventional studies.

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024 Kattlun, Hertel, Geis, Scherag, Wickel and Finke.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.