4.2 Review

Graph theoretical analysis of structural and functional connectivity MRI in normal and pathological brain networks

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10334-010-0205-z

关键词

Graph theory; Networks; Small-world; Structural connectivity; Functional connectivity; Tractography; Resting-state fMRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Graph theoretical analysis of structural and functional connectivity MRI data (ie. diffusion tractography or cortical volume correlation and resting-state or task-related (effective) fMRI, respectively) has provided new measures of human brain organization in vivo. The most striking discovery is that the whole-brain network exhibits small-world properties shared with many other complex systems (social, technological, information, biological). This topology allows a high efficiency at different spatial and temporal scale with a very low wiring and energy cost. Its modular organization also allows for a high level of adaptation. In addition, degree distribution of brain networks demonstrates highly connected hubs that are crucial for the whole-network functioning. Many of these hubs have been identified in regions previously defined as belonging to the default-mode network (potentially explaining the high basal metabolism of this network) and the attentional networks. This could explain the crucial role of these hub regions in physiology (task-related fMRI data) as well as in pathophysiology. Indeed, such topological definition provides a reliable framework for predicting behavioral consequences of focal or multifocal lesions such as stroke, tumors or multiple sclerosis. It also brings new insights into a better understanding of pathophysiology of many neurological or psychiatric diseases affecting specific local or global brain networks such as epilepsy, Alzheimer's disease or schizophrenia. Graph theoretical analysis of connectivity MRI data provides an outstanding framework to merge anatomical and functional data in order to better understand brain pathologies.

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

4.2
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