4.7 Article

Vestibular Responses to Direct Stimulation of the Human Insular Cortex

期刊

ANNALS OF NEUROLOGY
卷 76, 期 4, 页码 609-619

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/ana.24252

关键词

-

资金

  1. Volkswagen Foundation's European Platform for Life Sciences, Mind Sciences, and the Humanities The (Un)bound Body Project: Exploring the Constraints of Embodiment and the Limits of Body Representation [85639]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The present study provides a functional mapping of vestibular responses in the human insular cortex. Methods: A total of 642 electrical stimulations of the insula were performed in 219 patients, using stereotactically implanted depth electrodes, during the presurgical evaluation of drug-refractory partial epilepsy. We retrospectively identified 41 contacts where stimulation elicited vestibular sensations (VSs) and analyzed their location with respect to (1) their stereotactic coordinates (for all contacts), (2) the anatomy of insula gyri (for 20 vestibular sites), and (3) the probabilistic cytoarchitectonic maps of the insula (for 9 vestibular sites). Results: VSs occurred in 7.6% of the 541 evoked sensations after electrical stimulations of the insula. VSs were mostly obtained after stimulation of the posterior insula, that is, in the granular insular cortex and the postcentral insular gyrus. The data also suggest a spatial segregation of the responses in the insula, with the rotatory and translational VSs being evoked at more posterior stimulation sites than other less definable VSs. No left-right differences were observed. Interpretation: These results demonstrate vestibular sensory processing in the insula that is centered on its posterior part. The present data add to the understanding of the multiple sensory functions of the insular cortex and of the cortical processing of vestibular signals. The data also indicate that lesion or dysfunction in the posterior insula should be considered during the evaluation of vestibular epileptic seizures.

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