4.7 Article

Intrinsic Network Activity in Tinnitus Investigated Using Functional MRI

期刊

HUMAN BRAIN MAPPING
卷 37, 期 8, 页码 2717-2735

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/hbm.23204

关键词

auditory; functional connectivity; fMRI; striatum; thalamus; hearing loss

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [RC1-DC010720]
  2. American Tinnitus Association
  3. Tinnitus Research Consortium

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tinnitus is an increasingly common disorder in which patients experience phantom auditory sensations, usually ringing or buzzing in the ear. Tinnitus pathophysiology has been repeatedly shown to involve both auditory and non-auditory brain structures, making network-level studies of tinnitus critical. In this magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) study, two resting-state functional connectivity (RSFC) approaches were used to better understand functional network disturbances in tinnitus. First, we demonstrated tinnitus-related reductions in RSFC between specific brain regions and resting-state networks (RSNs), defined by independent components analysis (ICA) and chosen for their overlap with structures known to be affected in tinnitus. Then, we restricted ICA to data from tinnitus patients, and identified one RSN not apparent in control data. This tinnitus RSN included auditory-sensory regions like inferior colliculus and medial Heschl's gyrus, as well as classically non-auditory regions like the mediodorsal nucleus of the thalamus, striatum, lateral prefrontal, and orbitofrontal cortex. Notably, patients' reported tinnitus loudness was positively correlated with RSFC between the mediodorsal nucleus and the tinnitus RSN, indicating that this network may underlie the auditory-sensory experience of tinnitus. These data support the idea that tinnitus involves network dysfunction, and further stress the importance of communication between auditory-sensory and fronto-striatal circuits in tinnitus pathophysiology. (C) 2016 The Authors Human Brain Mapping Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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