[Neurobiological principles of borderline personality disorder: integration into the ICD-11 model of personality disorders]

Components of event-related potentials and borderline personality disorder: a meta-analysis

Background: Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is characterized by symptoms associated with difficulties in emotion regulation, altered self-image, impulsivity, and instability in personal relationships. A relationship has been found between BPD symptoms and altered neuropsychological processes. Studies of event-related potentials (ERP) measured with electroencephalogram (EEG) have found neural correlates related to BPD symptoms. Of note is the P300 component, considered a potential mental health biomarker for trauma-associated disorders. However, no meta-analysis has been found to demonstrate this relationship.Objectives: To evaluate the relationship between the P300 component and BPD symptoms. To evaluate the relationship of other ERP components with BPD symptoms.Methods: The method and procedure were adjusted to the PRISMA checklist. The search was performed in three databases: WOS, Scopus and PubMed. A Random Effects Model was used to perform the analysis of the studies. In addition, a meta-regression was performed with % women, Gini and GDP. Finally, a descriptive analysis of the main results found between P300, other ERP components (LPP, P100 and ERN/Ne) and BPD symptoms was performed.Results: From a review of 485 articles, a meta-analysis was performed with six articles that met the inclusion criteria. A moderate, positive relationship was found between the P300 component and BPD symptoms (REM = .489; p < .001). It was not possible to perform meta-analyses for other ERP components (LPP, P100 and ERN/Ne) due to the low number of articles found.Conclusion: The idea that P300 could be considered for use as a biomarker to identify altered neural correlates in BPD is reinforced. In addition, a moderating effect of inequality (Gini) was detected.

Pathophysiological aspects of complex PTSD - a neurobiological account in comparison to classic posttraumatic stress disorder and borderline personality disorder

Despite a great diagnostic overlap, complex posttraumatic stress disorder (CPTSD) has been recognised by the ICD-11 as a new, discrete entity and recent empirical evidence points towards a distinction from simple posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and borderline personality disorder (BPD). The development and maintenance of these disorders is sustained by neurobiological alterations and studies using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) may further contribute to a clear differentiation of CPTSD, PTSD and BPD. However, there are no existing fMRI studies directly comparing CPTSD, PTSD and BPD. In addition to a summarization of diagnostic differences and similarities, the current review aims to provide a qualitative comparison of neuroimaging findings on affective, attentional and memory processing in CPTSD, PTSD and BPD. Our narrative review alludes to an imbalance in limbic-frontal brain networks, which may be partially trans-diagnostically linked to the degree of trauma symptoms and their expression. Thus, CPTSD, PTSD and BPD may underlie a continuum where similar brain regions are involved but the direction of activation may constitute its distinct symptom expression. The neuronal alterations across these disorders may conceivably be better understood along a symptom-based continuum underlying CPTSD, PTSD and BPD. Further research is needed to amend for the heterogeneity in experimental paradigms and sample criteria.

Improving treatment outcomes for borderline personality disorder: what can we learn from biomarker studies of psychotherapy?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a severe and common psychiatric disorder and though evidence-based psychotherapies are effective, rates of treatment nonresponse are as high as 50%. Treatment studies may benefit from interdisciplinary approaches from neuroscience and genetics research that could generate novel insights into treatment mechanisms and tailoring interventions to the individual.

RECENT FINDINGS

We provide a timely update to the small but growing body of literature investigating neurobiological and epigenetic changes and using biomarkers to predict outcomes from evidence-based psychotherapies for BPD. Using a rapid review methodology, we identified eight new studies, updating our earlier 2018 systematic review. Across all studies, neuroimaging ( n  = 18) and genetics studies ( n  = 4) provide data from 735 participants diagnosed with BPD (mean sample size across studies = 33.4, range 2-115).

SUMMARY

We report further evidence for psychotherapy-related alterations of neural activation and connectivity in regions and networks relating to executive control, emotion regulation, and self/interpersonal functioning in BPD. Emerging evidence also shows epigenetic changes following treatment. Future large-scale multisite studies may help to delineate multilevel treatment targets to inform intervention design, selection, and monitoring for the individual patient via integration of knowledge generated through clinical, neuroscience, and genetics research.

Clinical Implications of ICD-11 for Diagnosing and Treating Personality Disorders

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The International Classification of Diseases 11th revision (ICD-11) introduced a new approach to personality disorders and related traits. This paper reviews recent literature on the assessment of ICD-11 personality disorders and implications for clinical diagnosis, decision-making, and treatment.

RECENT FINDINGS

We reviewed findings on two measures developed for the ICD-11 model of personality dysfunction and six inventories for the ICD-11 trait specifiers. The psychometric qualities of these tools are promising, and they allow for both rapid screening and fine-grained assessment. Implications for clinical diagnosis and treatment of personality disorders are reviewed including utility for forensic practice. Based on evidence and our experience, we provide some recommendations for severity- and trait-informed interventions. Initial evidence supports the available instruments for assessing ICD-11 personality disorders. More research is needed including development of clinician-rating forms and diagnostic interviews as well as treatment protocols and trials based on the new ICD-11 classification.