4.5 Article

Altered resting-state functional organization within the central executive network in obsessive-compulsive disorder

期刊

PSYCHIATRY AND CLINICAL NEUROSCIENCES
卷 70, 期 10, 页码 448-456

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/pcn.12419

关键词

central executive network; functional connectivity; independent component analysis; obsessive-compulsive disorder; regional homogeneity

资金

  1. Scientific Research Foundation of Qiqihar Medical University, China [QY2013Q-03]
  2. Open Research Fund of the Key Laboratory of Psychiatric Diagnosis and Treatment, Beijing

向作者/读者索取更多资源

AimObsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is associated with deficits in response inhibition and planning, which are governed by the central executive network. The objective of this study was to investigate both intra- and inter-regional resting-state connectivity within the central executive network in OCD. MethodsThirty OCD patients and 30 matched healthy controls were scanned using resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging. The independent component analysis was used on a separate sample of healthy controls to generate the central executive network mask for the subsequent OCD analyses. Regional homogeneity (ReHo) and seed-based functional connectivity analyses were used to explore the differences between intra- and inter-regional synchronized activity within the central executive network in OCD patients at rest. ResultsIncreased ReHo and functional connectivity in the key regions of the central executive network, such as the orbitofrontal cortex, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, and the angular gyrus, were found in OCD patients. Furthermore, changes in both the ReHo within the orbitofrontal cortex and the functional connectivity between the orbitofrontal cortex and angular gyrus were negatively correlated with OCD duration. ConclusionThe increased resting-state functional organization within the central executive network may be related to OCD patients' deficits in cognitive control and symptom progression.

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

4.5
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