Michael J Paldino1, Zili D Chu1, Mary L Chapieski2, Farahnaz Golriz1, Wei Zhang1,3. 1. 1 Department of Radiology, Texas Children's Hospital, Houston, TX, USA. 2. 2 Department of Pediatric Medicine, Texas Children's Hospital, Houston, TX, USA. 3. 3 Outcomes and Impact Service, Texas Children's Hospital, Houston, TX, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To measure the repeatability of metrics that quantify brain network architecture derived from resting-state functional MRI in a cohort of paediatric patients with epilepsy. METHODS: We identified patients with: (1) epilepsy; (2) brain MRI at 3 T; (3) two identical resting-state functional MRI acquisitions performed on the same day. Undirected, weighted networks were constructed based on the resting-state time series using a range of processing parameters including parcellation size and graph threshold. The following topological properties were calculated: degree, strength, characteristic path length, global efficiency, clustering coefficient, modularity and small worldness. Based on repeated measures, we then calculated: (1) Pearson correlation coefficient; (2) intraclass correlation coefficient; (3) root-mean-square coefficient of variation; (4) repeatability coefficient; and (5) 95% confidence limits for change. RESULTS: 26 patients were included (age range: 4-21 years). Correlation coefficients demonstrated a highly consistent relationship between repeated observations for all metrics, and the intraclass correlation coefficients were generally in the excellent range. Repeatability in the data set was not significantly influenced by parcellation size. However, trends towards decreased repeatability were observed at higher graph thresholds. CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate the reliability of network metrics in a cohort of paediatric patients with epilepsy. Advances in knowledge: Our results point to the potential for graph theoretical analyses of resting-state data to provide reliable markers of network architecture in children with epilepsy. At the level of an individual patient, change over time greater than the repeatability coefficient or 95% confidence limits for change is unlikely to be related to intrinsic variability of the method.
OBJECTIVE: To measure the repeatability of metrics that quantify brain network architecture derived from resting-state functional MRI in a cohort of paediatric patients with epilepsy. METHODS: We identified patients with: (1) epilepsy; (2) brain MRI at 3 T; (3) two identical resting-state functional MRI acquisitions performed on the same day. Undirected, weighted networks were constructed based on the resting-state time series using a range of processing parameters including parcellation size and graph threshold. The following topological properties were calculated: degree, strength, characteristic path length, global efficiency, clustering coefficient, modularity and small worldness. Based on repeated measures, we then calculated: (1) Pearson correlation coefficient; (2) intraclass correlation coefficient; (3) root-mean-square coefficient of variation; (4) repeatability coefficient; and (5) 95% confidence limits for change. RESULTS: 26 patients were included (age range: 4-21 years). Correlation coefficients demonstrated a highly consistent relationship between repeated observations for all metrics, and the intraclass correlation coefficients were generally in the excellent range. Repeatability in the data set was not significantly influenced by parcellation size. However, trends towards decreased repeatability were observed at higher graph thresholds. CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate the reliability of network metrics in a cohort of paediatric patients with epilepsy. Advances in knowledge: Our results point to the potential for graph theoretical analyses of resting-state data to provide reliable markers of network architecture in children with epilepsy. At the level of an individual patient, change over time greater than the repeatability coefficient or 95% confidence limits for change is unlikely to be related to intrinsic variability of the method.
Authors: Stephen M Smith; Mark Jenkinson; Mark W Woolrich; Christian F Beckmann; Timothy E J Behrens; Heidi Johansen-Berg; Peter R Bannister; Marilena De Luca; Ivana Drobnjak; David E Flitney; Rami K Niazy; James Saunders; John Vickers; Yongyue Zhang; Nicola De Stefano; J Michael Brady; Paul M Matthews Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2004 Impact factor: 6.556
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: Matthew R Brier; Jewell B Thomas; Anne M Fagan; Jason Hassenstab; David M Holtzman; Tammie L Benzinger; John C Morris; Beau M Ances Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2013-10-18 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: Ernesto J Sanz-Arigita; Menno M Schoonheim; Jessica S Damoiseaux; Serge A R B Rombouts; Erik Maris; Frederik Barkhof; Philip Scheltens; Cornelis J Stam Journal: PLoS One Date: 2010-11-01 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Erik de Water; Paul Curtin; Anna Zilverstand; Andreas Sjödin; Anny Bonilla; Julie B Herbstman; Judyth Ramirez; Amy E Margolis; Ravi Bansal; Robin M Whyatt; Bradley S Peterson; Pam Factor-Litvak; Megan K Horton Journal: J Child Psychol Psychiatry Date: 2019-03-18 Impact factor: 8.982
Authors: Amy E Margolis; Sarah Banker; David Pagliaccio; Erik De Water; Paul Curtin; Anny Bonilla; Julie B Herbstman; Robin Whyatt; Ravi Bansal; Andreas Sjödin; Michael P Milham; Bradley S Peterson; Pam Factor-Litvak; Megan K Horton Journal: Environ Int Date: 2019-11-16 Impact factor: 9.621
Authors: Sarah M Banker; Bruce Ramphal; David Pagliaccio; Lauren Thomas; Elizabeth Rosen; Anika N Sigel; Thomas Zeffiro; Rachel Marsh; Amy E Margolis Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-01-17 Impact factor: 4.379