Casey C Armstrong1, Teena D Moody2, Jamie D Feusner2, James T McCracken1, Susanna Chang1, Jennifer G Levitt1, John C Piacentini1, Joseph O'Neill3. 1. Division of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, UCLA Semel Institute for Neurosciences, 760 Westwood Plaza, Los Angeles, CA 90024-1759, United States. 2. Division of Adult Psychiatry, UCLA Semel Institute for Neurosciences, Los Angeles, CA, United States. 3. Division of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, UCLA Semel Institute for Neurosciences, 760 Westwood Plaza, Los Angeles, CA 90024-1759, United States. Electronic address: joneill@mednet.ucla.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: fMRI graph theory reveals resting-state brain networks, but has never been used in pediatric OCD. METHODS: Whole-brain resting-state fMRI was acquired at 3T from 21 children with OCD and 20 age-matched healthy controls. BOLD connectivity was analyzed yielding global and local graph-theory metrics across 100 child-based functional nodes. We also compared local metrics between groups in frontopolar, supplementary motor, and sensorimotor cortices, regions implicated in recent neuroimaging and/or brain stimulation treatment studies in OCD. RESULTS: As in adults, the global metric small-worldness was significantly (P<0.05) lower in patients than controls, by 13.5% (%mean difference=100%X(OCD mean - control mean)/control mean). This suggests less efficient information transfer in patients. In addition, modularity was lower in OCD (15.1%, P<0.01), suggesting less granular - or differently organized - functional brain parcellation. Higher clustering coefficients (23.9-32.4%, P<0.05) were observed in patients in frontopolar, supplementary motor, sensorimotor, and cortices with lower betweenness centrality (-63.6%, P<0.01) at one frontopolar site. These findings are consistent with more locally intensive connectivity or less interaction with other brain regions at these sites. LIMITATIONS: Relatively large node size; relatively small sample size, comorbidities in some patients. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric OCD patients demonstrate aberrant global and local resting-state network connectivity topologies compared to healthy children. Local results accord with recent views of OCD as a disorder with sensorimotor component.
BACKGROUND: fMRI graph theory reveals resting-state brain networks, but has never been used in pediatric OCD. METHODS: Whole-brain resting-state fMRI was acquired at 3T from 21 children with OCD and 20 age-matched healthy controls. BOLD connectivity was analyzed yielding global and local graph-theory metrics across 100 child-based functional nodes. We also compared local metrics between groups in frontopolar, supplementary motor, and sensorimotor cortices, regions implicated in recent neuroimaging and/or brain stimulation treatment studies in OCD. RESULTS: As in adults, the global metric small-worldness was significantly (P<0.05) lower in patients than controls, by 13.5% (%mean difference=100%X(OCD mean - control mean)/control mean). This suggests less efficient information transfer in patients. In addition, modularity was lower in OCD (15.1%, P<0.01), suggesting less granular - or differently organized - functional brain parcellation. Higher clustering coefficients (23.9-32.4%, P<0.05) were observed in patients in frontopolar, supplementary motor, sensorimotor, and cortices with lower betweenness centrality (-63.6%, P<0.01) at one frontopolar site. These findings are consistent with more locally intensive connectivity or less interaction with other brain regions at these sites. LIMITATIONS: Relatively large node size; relatively small sample size, comorbidities in some patients. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric OCDpatients demonstrate aberrant global and local resting-state network connectivity topologies compared to healthy children. Local results accord with recent views of OCD as a disorder with sensorimotor component.
Authors: Murat Yücel; Ben J Harrison; Stephen J Wood; Alex Fornito; Robert M Wellard; Jesus Pujol; Kerrie Clarke; Mary L Phillips; Michael Kyrios; Dennis Velakoulis; Christos Pantelis Journal: Arch Gen Psychiatry Date: 2007-08
Authors: Urs Braun; Michael M Plichta; Christine Esslinger; Carina Sauer; Leila Haddad; Oliver Grimm; Daniela Mier; Sebastian Mohnke; Andreas Heinz; Susanne Erk; Henrik Walter; Nina Seiferth; Peter Kirsch; Andreas Meyer-Lindenberg Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2011-08-23 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: W J Triggs; K J McCoy; R Greer; F Rossi; D Bowers; S Kortenkamp; S E Nadeau; K M Heilman; W K Goodman Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 1999-06-01 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: Lara Menzies; Samuel R Chamberlain; Angela R Laird; Sarah M Thelen; Barbara J Sahakian; Ed T Bullmore Journal: Neurosci Biobehav Rev Date: 2007-10-17 Impact factor: 8.989
Authors: Tilmann Bunse; Thomas Wobrock; Wolfgang Strube; Frank Padberg; Ullrich Palm; Peter Falkai; Alkomiet Hasan Journal: Brain Stimul Date: 2013-12-14 Impact factor: 8.955
Authors: Amy L Friedman; Ashley Burgess; Karthik Ramaseshan; Phil Easter; Dalal Khatib; Asadur Chowdury; Paul D Arnold; Gregory L Hanna; David R Rosenberg; Vaibhav A Diwadkar Journal: Psychiatry Res Neuroimaging Date: 2016-12-13 Impact factor: 2.376
Authors: Gail A Bernstein; Kathryn R Cullen; Elizabeth C Harris; Christine A Conelea; Alexandra D Zagoloff; Patricia A Carstedt; Susanne S Lee; Bryon A Mueller Journal: J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry Date: 2018-10-30 Impact factor: 8.829
Authors: Aaron F Alexander-Bloch; Rahul Sood; Russell T Shinohara; Tyler M Moore; Monica E Calkins; Casey Chertavian; Daniel H Wolf; Ruben C Gur; Theodore D Satterthwaite; Raquel E Gur; Ran Barzilay Journal: Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging Date: 2021-08-08
Authors: Marilyn Cyr; David Pagliaccio; Paula Yanes-Lukin; Pablo Goldberg; Martine Fontaine; Moira A Rynn; Rachel Marsh Journal: Depress Anxiety Date: 2021-06-22 Impact factor: 8.128