Cited by 46Posttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology ResearchChild Abuse and Trauma

The distinctive neural circuitry of complex posttraumatic stress disorder during threat processing

Bryant, Richard A., Felmingham, Kim L., Malhi, Gin, Andrew, Elpiniki, Korgaonkar, Mayuresh S.·2021·Psychological Medicine

Abstract

Background: There is controversy over the extent to which the new International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) diagnosis of complex posttraumatic stress disorder (CPTSD) is distinct from posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). This study aimed to conduct the first investigation of distinctive neural processes during threat processing in CPTSD relative to PTSD. Method: This cross-sectional functional magnetic resonance study included 99 participants who met criteria for PTSD (PTSD = 32, CPTSD = 28) and 39 trauma-exposed controls. PTSD was assessed with the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS). CPTSD was assessed with an adapted version of the International Trauma Questionnaire. Neural responses were measured across the brain while threat or neutral faces were presented at both supraliminal and subliminal levels. Results: During supraliminal presentations of threat stimuli, there was greater bilateral insula and right amygdala activation in CPTSD participants relative to PTSD. Reduced supraliminal right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex activation and increased subliminal amygdala and insula activation were observed as common dysfunction for both CPTSD and PTSD groups relative to trauma controls. There were no significant differences in terms of subliminal presentations and no differences in functional connectivity. Dissociative responses were positively associated with right insula activation (r = 0.347, p < 0.01). Conclusions: These results provide the first evidence of distinct neural profiles of CPTSD and PTSD during threat processing. The observation of increased insula and right amygdala activation in CPTSD accords with the proposal that CPTSD is distinguished from PTSD by disturbances in emotion regulation and self-concept.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0033291719003921

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bryant, R. A., Felmingham, K. L., Malhi, G., Andrew, E., & Korgaonkar, M. S.
Affiliations
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
Corresponding author
Bryant, Richard A.
Venue
Psychological Medicine
Published
2020-01-08
Volume
51
Issue
7
Pages
1121-1128
ISSN
  • 0033-2917 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8978
OpenAlex
W3000333001
Cited by
46
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1
FWCI
2.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child Abuse and Trauma
Keywords
complex PTSD, post-traumatic stress disorder, threat processing, insula, amygdala, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, dissociation, emotion regulation, self-concept, neural circuits
MeSH terms
Adult, Amygdala, Cross-Sectional Studies, Dissociative Disorders, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, Prefrontal Cortex, International Classification of Diseases, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review