4.7 Article

Resting-state functional connectivity associated with mild cognitive impairment in Parkinson's disease

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY
卷 262, 期 2, 页码 425-434

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00415-014-7591-5

关键词

Movement disorders; Parkinson's disease; Cognitive disorders and dementia; Mild cognitive impairment; fMRI; Imaging

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cognitive impairment is common in PD, even in early stages. The construct of mild cognitive impairment has been used to identify clinically evident cognitive impairment without functional decline in PD patients (PD-MCI). The aim of the present study was to investigate brain connectivity associated with PD-MCI through RS-fMRI. RS-fMRI at 3T was collected in 42 PD patients and 20 matched healthy controls. Among PD patients, 21 were classified as having MCI (PD-MCI) and 21 as cognitively unimpaired (PD-nMCI) based on criteria for possible PD-MCI (level I category). Single-subject and group-level ICA was used to investigate the integrity of brain networks related to cognition in PD patients with and without MCI. Image data processing and statistical analysis were performed in BrainVoyager QX. In addition, we used VBM to test whether functional connectivity differences were related to structural abnormalities. PD-nMCI and PD-MCI patients compared with controls showed decreased DMN connectivity. PD-MCI patients, but not PD-nMCI, compared with controls, showed decreased functional connectivity of bilateral prefrontal cortex within the frontoparietal network. The decreased prefrontal cortex connectivity correlated with cognitive parameters but not with clinical variables. VBM analysis did not reveal any difference in local gray matter between patients and controls. Our findings suggest that an altered DMN connectivity characterizes PD patients, regardless of cognitive status, whereas a functional disconnection of the frontoparietal network could be associated with MCI in PD in the absence of detectable structural changes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据