Avner Meoded1, Rohan Katipally, Thangamadhan Bosemani, Thierry A G M Huisman, Andrea Poretti. 1. Section of Pediatric Neuroradiology, Division of Pediatric Radiology, The Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Charlotte R. Bloomberg Children's Center, Sheikh Zayed Tower, Room 4174, 1800 Orleans Street, Baltimore, MD, 21287-0842, USA, ameoded1@jhmi.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Structural connectivity analysis is an ideal tool to study connections in brain malformations. We aimed to characterize the topological network measures and study sub-networks in children with agenesis of the corpus callosum (AgCC). We hypothesized a more segregated structural network in children with AgCC. METHODS: Structural connectivity analysis including topology analysis and network-based-statistics was applied in children with AgCC and age-matched controls. Probabilistic-tractography and brain segmentation into 108 regions were performed. For controls, structural connectivity has been analyzed after excluding the callosal connections ('virtual callosotomy'). RESULTS: Ten patients (six males, mean age 6.5 years, SD 4.5 years) and ten controls (mean age 5.9 years, SD 4.7 years) were included. In patients, topology analysis revealed higher clustering coefficient and transitivity and lower small world index and assortativity compared to controls. The bilateral insula were identified as hubs in patients, whereas the cerebellum was detected as a hub only in controls. Three sub-networks of increased connectivity were identified in patients. CONCLUSIONS: We found reduced global and increased local connectivity in children with AgCC compared to controls. Neural plasticity in AgCC may attempt to increase the interhemispheric connectivity through alternative decussating pathways other than the corpus callosum. KEY POINTS: • The structural connectivity analysis quantifies white-matter networks within the brain • In callosal agenesis there is reduced global and increased local connectivity • In callosal agenesis, alternative decussating pathways are used for interhemispheric connectivity.
OBJECTIVES: Structural connectivity analysis is an ideal tool to study connections in brain malformations. We aimed to characterize the topological network measures and study sub-networks in children with agenesis of the corpus callosum (AgCC). We hypothesized a more segregated structural network in children with AgCC. METHODS: Structural connectivity analysis including topology analysis and network-based-statistics was applied in children with AgCC and age-matched controls. Probabilistic-tractography and brain segmentation into 108 regions were performed. For controls, structural connectivity has been analyzed after excluding the callosal connections ('virtual callosotomy'). RESULTS: Ten patients (six males, mean age 6.5 years, SD 4.5 years) and ten controls (mean age 5.9 years, SD 4.7 years) were included. In patients, topology analysis revealed higher clustering coefficient and transitivity and lower small world index and assortativity compared to controls. The bilateral insula were identified as hubs in patients, whereas the cerebellum was detected as a hub only in controls. Three sub-networks of increased connectivity were identified in patients. CONCLUSIONS: We found reduced global and increased local connectivity in children with AgCC compared to controls. Neural plasticity in AgCC may attempt to increase the interhemispheric connectivity through alternative decussating pathways other than the corpus callosum. KEY POINTS: • The structural connectivity analysis quantifies white-matter networks within the brain • In callosal agenesis there is reduced global and increased local connectivity • In callosal agenesis, alternative decussating pathways are used for interhemispheric connectivity.
Authors: Mark Jenkinson; Christian F Beckmann; Timothy E J Behrens; Mark W Woolrich; Stephen M Smith Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2011-09-16 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Nicolas A Crossley; Andrea Mechelli; Jessica Scott; Francesco Carletti; Peter T Fox; Philip McGuire; Edward T Bullmore Journal: Brain Date: 2014-06-19 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: C Cesaretti; M Nanni; T Ghi; C Parazzini; G Conte; E Contro; G Grisolia; A Righini Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2015-10-29 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: M Severino; D Tortora; B Toselli; S Uccella; M Traverso; G Morana; V Capra; E Veneselli; M M Fato; A Rossi Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2017-01-19 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Avner Meoded; Thierry A G M Huisman; Maria Grazia Sacco Casamassima; George I Jallo; Andrea Poretti Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2017-04-05 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Lisa Bartha-Doering; Ernst Schwartz; Kathrin Kollndorfer; Florian Ph S Fischmeister; Astrid Novak; Georg Langs; Harald Werneck; Daniela Prayer; Rainer Seidl; Gregor Kasprian Journal: Brain Struct Funct Date: 2021-01-26 Impact factor: 3.270
Authors: Vanessa Siffredi; Maria G Preti; Silvia Obertino; Richard J Leventer; Amanda G Wood; Alissandra McIlroy; Vicki Anderson; Megan M Spencer-Smith; Dimitri Van De Ville Journal: Dev Sci Date: 2021-06-01