4.7 Article

Stroke and Neurodegeneration Induce Different Connectivity Aberrations in the Insula

期刊

STROKE
卷 46, 期 9, 页码 2673-2677

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.009598

关键词

cerebral cortex; dementia; magnetic resonance imaging; stroke

资金

  1. Fondo Nacional de Desarrollo Cientifico y Tecnologico Regular (FONDECYT) [1130920/1140114]
  2. Proyecto de investigacion de Ciencia y Tecnologia [PICT 2012-0412/2012-1309]
  3. Ineco Foundation
  4. Innovation and Dissemination Center for Neuromathematics (FAPESP, S. Paulo Research Foundation) [2013/07699-0]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and Purpose-Stroke and neurodegeneration cause significant brain damage and cognitive impairment, especially if the insular cortex is compromised. This study explores for the first time whether these 2 causes differentially alter connectivity patterns in the insular cortex. Methods-Resting state-functional magnetic resonance imaging data were collected from patients with insular stroke, patients with behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia, and healthy controls. Data from the 3 groups were assessed through a correlation function analysis. Specifically, we compared decreases in connectivity as a function of voxel Euclidean distance within the insular cortex. Results-Relative to controls, patients with stroke showed faster connectivity decays as a function of distance (hypoconnectivity). In contrast, the behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia group exhibited significant hyperconnectivity between neighboring voxels. Both patient groups evinced global hypoconnectivity. No between-group differences were observed in a volumetrically and functionally comparable region without ischemia or neurodegeneration. Conclusions-Functional insular cortex connectivity is affected differently by cerebral ischemia and neurodegeneration, possibly because of differences in the cause-specific pathophysiological mechanisms of each disease. These findings have important clinical and theoretical implications.

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