4.7 Article

EEG microstate complexity for aiding early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 10, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-74790-7

关键词

-

资金

  1. EPSRC [EP/P021417/1, EP/N014391/1]
  2. Wellcome Trust Institutional Strategic Support Award [WT105618MA]
  3. Alzheimer's Society
  4. Garfield Weston Foundation [231]
  5. University Research Fellowship from the University of Bristol
  6. University of San Marino
  7. ISS
  8. EPSRC [EP/P021417/1, EP/N014391/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The dynamics of the resting brain exhibit transitions between a small number of discrete networks, each remaining stable for tens to hundreds of milliseconds. These functional microstates are thought to be the building blocks of spontaneous consciousness. The electroencephalogram (EEG) is a useful tool for imaging microstates, and EEG microstate analysis can potentially give insight into altered brain dynamics underpinning cognitive impairment in disorders such as Alzheimer's disease (AD). Since EEG is non-invasive and relatively inexpensive, EEG microstates have the potential to be useful clinical tools for aiding early diagnosis of AD. In this study, EEG was collected from two independent cohorts of probable AD and cognitively healthy control participants, and a cohort of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) patients with four-year clinical follow-up. The microstate associated with the frontoparietal working-memory/attention network was altered in AD due to parietal inactivation. Using a novel measure of complexity, we found microstate transitioning was slower and less complex in AD. When combined with a spectral EEG measure, microstate complexity could classify AD with sensitivity and specificity >80%, which was tested on an independent cohort, and could predict progression from MCI to AD in a small preliminary test cohort of 11 participants. EEG microstates therefore have potential to be a non-invasive functional biomarker of AD.

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