4.5 Article

Relationship between the anterior forebrain mesocircuit and the default mode network in the structural bases of disorders of consciousness

期刊

NEUROIMAGE-CLINICAL
卷 10, 期 -, 页码 27-35

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.nicl.2015.11.004

关键词

Disorders of consciousness; Default mode network; Thalamus; Basal ganglia; Anterior forebrain mesocircuit; Precuneus; DTI; Tractography; White matter; Traumatic brain injury; Hypoxic-ischemic brain injury; Vegetative state; Minimally conscious state

资金

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research [0000032597]
  2. James S. McDonnell Foundation
  3. Schulich Research Opportunities Program
  4. Canada Excellence Research Chairs Program [0000025914]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The specific neural bases of disorders of consciousness (DOC) are still not well understood. Some studies have suggested that functional and structural impairments in the default mode network may play a role in explaining these disorders. In contrast, others have proposed that dysfunctions in the anterior forebrain mesocircuit involving striatum, globus pallidus, and thalamus may be the main underlying mechanism. Here, we provide the first report of structural integrity of fiber tracts connecting the nodes of the mesocircuit and the default mode network in 8 patients with DOC. We found evidence of significant damage to subcortico-cortical and cortico-cortical fibers, which were more severe in vegetative state patients and correlated with clinical severity as determined by Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R) scores. In contrast, fiber tracts interconnecting subcortical nodes were not significantly impaired. Lastly, we found significant damage in all fiber tracts connecting the precuneus with cortical and subcortical areas. Our results suggest a strong relationship between the default mode network and most importantly the precuneus - and the anterior forebrain mesocircuit in the neural basis of the DOC. (C) 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier 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

4.5
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