4.2 Article

Structural evidence for involvement of a left amygdala-orbitofrontal network in subclinical anxiety

Journal

PSYCHIATRY RESEARCH-NEUROIMAGING
Volume 194, Issue 3, Pages 296-303

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pscychresns.2011.05.007

Keywords

Subcortical volumes; Cortical thickness; Fear; Morphometry; Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Funding

  1. FACES (Finding a Cure for Epilepsy and Seizures)
  2. NIH [NS18741, NS44623]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Functional neuroimaging implicates hyperactivity of amygdala-orbitofrontal circuitry as a common neurobiological mechanism underlying the development of anxiety. Less is known about anxiety-related structural differences in this network. In this study, a sample of healthy adults with no history of anxiety disorders completed a 3T MRI scan and self-report mood inventories. Post-processing quantitative MRI image analysis included segmentation and volume estimation of subcortical structures, which were regressed on anxiety inventory scores, with depression scores used to establish discriminant validity. We then used a quantitative vertex-based post-processing method to correlate (1) anxiety scores and (2) left amygdala volumes with cortical thickness across the whole cortical mantle. Left amygdala volumes predicted anxiety, with decreased amygdala volume associated with higher anxiety on both state and trait anxiety measures. A negative correlation between left amygdala volume and cortical thickness overlapped with a positive correlation between anxiety and cortical thickness in left lateral orbitofrontal cortex. These results suggest a structural anxiety network that corresponds with a large body of evidence from functional neuroimaging. Such findings raise the possibility that structural abnormalities may result in a greater vulnerability to anxiety or conversely that elevated anxiety symptoms may result in focal structural changes. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available