3.9 Review

Structural magnetic ressonance imaging in anxiety disorders: an update of research findings

Journal

REVISTA BRASILEIRA DE PSIQUIATRIA
Volume 30, Issue 3, Pages 251-264

Publisher

ASSOC BRASILEIRA PSIQUIATRIA
DOI: 10.1590/S1516-44462008000300013

Keywords

anxiety; magnetic resonance imaging; image processing computer-assisted; cone-beam computed tomography; models, structural

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: The aim of the present report is to present a systematic and critical review of the more recent literature data about structural abnormalities detected by magnetic ressonance in anxiety disorders. Method: A review of the literature in the last five years was conducted by a search of the Medline, Lilacs and SciELO indexing services using the following key words: anxiety, 'panic, agoraphobia, social anxiety, posttraumatic and obsessive-compulsive, crossed one by one with magnetic resonance, voxel-based, ROI and morphometry. Results: We selected 134 articles and 41 of them were included in our review. Recent studies have shown significant morphological abnormalities in various brain regions of patients with anxiety disorders and healthy controls. Despite some apparently contradictory findings, perhaps reflecting the variability and limitations of the methodologies used, certain brain regions appear to be altered in a consistent and relatively specific manner in some anxiety disorders. These include the hippocampus and the anterior cingulate cortex in posttraumatic stress disorder and the orbitofrontal cortex in obsessive-compulsive disorder Conclusions: The present review indicates that structural neuroimaging has contributed to a better understanding of the neurobiology of anxiety disorders. Further development of neuroimaging techniques, better sample standardization and the integration of data across neuroimaging modalities may extend progress in this area.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available