Yuta Aoki1, Samuele Cortese1,2,3, Francisco Xavier Castellanos1,4. 1. Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY, USA. 2. Academic Unit of Psychology and Clinical and Experimental Sciences (CNS and Psychiatry), University of Southampton, Southampton. 3. Solent NHS Trust, Southampton, UK. 4. Nathan S. Kline Institute for Psychiatric Research, Orangeburg, NY, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Diffusion tensor imaging studies have shown atypical fractional anisotropy (FA) in individuals with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), albeit with conflicting results. We performed meta-analyses of whole-brain voxel-based analyses (WBVBA) and tract-based spatial statistics (TBSS) studies in ADHD, along with a qualitative review of TBSS studies addressing the issue of head motion, which may bias results. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search (last search on April 1st, 2016) to identify studies comparing FA values between individuals with ADHD and typically developing (TD) participants. Signed differential mapping was used to compute effect sizes and integrate WBVBA and TBSS studies, respectively. TBSS datasets reporting no between-group motion differences were identified. RESULTS: We identified 14 WBVBA (ADHDn = 314, TDn = 278) and 13 TBSS datasets (ADHDn = 557, TDn = 568). WBVBA meta-analysis showed both significantly lower and higher FA values in individuals with ADHD; TBSS meta-analysis showed significantly lower FA in ADHD compared with TD in four clusters: two in the corpus callosum (isthmus and posterior midbody), one in right inferior fronto-occipital fasciculus, and one in left inferior longitudinal fasciculus. However, four of six datasets confirming no group-differences in motion showed no significant between-group FA differences. CONCLUSIONS: A growing diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) literature (total N = 1,717) and a plethora of apparent findings suggest atypical interhemispheric connection in ADHD. However, FA results in ADHD should be considered with caution, since many studies did not examine potential group differences in head motion, and most of the studies reporting no difference in motion showed no significant results. Future studies should address head motion as a priority and assure that groups do not differ in head motion.
BACKGROUND: Diffusion tensor imaging studies have shown atypical fractional anisotropy (FA) in individuals with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), albeit with conflicting results. We performed meta-analyses of whole-brain voxel-based analyses (WBVBA) and tract-based spatial statistics (TBSS) studies in ADHD, along with a qualitative review of TBSS studies addressing the issue of head motion, which may bias results. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search (last search on April 1st, 2016) to identify studies comparing FA values between individuals with ADHD and typically developing (TD) participants. Signed differential mapping was used to compute effect sizes and integrate WBVBA and TBSS studies, respectively. TBSS datasets reporting no between-group motion differences were identified. RESULTS: We identified 14 WBVBA (ADHDn = 314, TDn = 278) and 13 TBSS datasets (ADHDn = 557, TDn = 568). WBVBA meta-analysis showed both significantly lower and higher FA values in individuals with ADHD; TBSS meta-analysis showed significantly lower FA in ADHD compared with TD in four clusters: two in the corpus callosum (isthmus and posterior midbody), one in right inferior fronto-occipital fasciculus, and one in left inferior longitudinal fasciculus. However, four of six datasets confirming no group-differences in motion showed no significant between-group FA differences. CONCLUSIONS: A growing diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) literature (total N = 1,717) and a plethora of apparent findings suggest atypical interhemispheric connection in ADHD. However, FA results in ADHD should be considered with caution, since many studies did not examine potential group differences in head motion, and most of the studies reporting no difference in motion showed no significant results. Future studies should address head motion as a priority and assure that groups do not differ in head motion.
Authors: Yuta Aoki; Yuliya N Yoncheva; Bosi Chen; Tanmay Nath; Dillon Sharp; Mariana Lazar; Pablo Velasco; Michael P Milham; Adriana Di Martino Journal: JAMA Psychiatry Date: 2017-11-01 Impact factor: 21.596
Authors: Martine Hoogman; Ryan Muetzel; Joao P Guimaraes; Elena Shumskaya; Maarten Mennes; Marcel P Zwiers; Neda Jahanshad; Gustavo Sudre; Thomas Wolfers; Eric A Earl; Juan Carlos Soliva Vila; Yolanda Vives-Gilabert; Sabin Khadka; Stephanie E Novotny; Catharina A Hartman; Dirk J Heslenfeld; Lizanne J S Schweren; Sara Ambrosino; Bob Oranje; Patrick de Zeeuw; Tiffany M Chaim-Avancini; Pedro G P Rosa; Marcus V Zanetti; Charles B Malpas; Gregor Kohls; Georg G von Polier; Jochen Seitz; Joseph Biederman; Alysa E Doyle; Anders M Dale; Theo G M van Erp; Jeffery N Epstein; Terry L Jernigan; Ramona Baur-Streubel; Georg C Ziegler; Kathrin C Zierhut; Anouk Schrantee; Marie F Høvik; Astri J Lundervold; Clare Kelly; Hazel McCarthy; Norbert Skokauskas; Ruth L O'Gorman Tuura; Anna Calvo; Sara Lera-Miguel; Rosa Nicolau; Kaylita C Chantiluke; Anastasia Christakou; Alasdair Vance; Mara Cercignani; Matt C Gabel; Philip Asherson; Sarah Baumeister; Daniel Brandeis; Sarah Hohmann; Ivanei E Bramati; Fernanda Tovar-Moll; Andreas J Fallgatter; Bernd Kardatzki; Lena Schwarz; Anatoly Anikin; Alexandr Baranov; Tinatin Gogberashvili; Dmitry Kapilushniy; Anastasia Solovieva; Hanan El Marroun; Tonya White; Georgii Karkashadze; Leyla Namazova-Baranova; Thomas Ethofer; Paulo Mattos; Tobias Banaschewski; David Coghill; Kerstin J Plessen; Jonna Kuntsi; Mitul A Mehta; Yannis Paloyelis; Neil A Harrison; Mark A Bellgrove; Tim J Silk; Ana I Cubillo; Katya Rubia; Luisa Lazaro; Silvia Brem; Susanne Walitza; Thomas Frodl; Mariam Zentis; Francisco X Castellanos; Yuliya N Yoncheva; Jan Haavik; Liesbeth Reneman; Annette Conzelmann; Klaus-Peter Lesch; Paul Pauli; Andreas Reif; Leanne Tamm; Kerstin Konrad; Eileen Oberwelland Weiss; Geraldo F Busatto; Mario R Louza; Sarah Durston; Pieter J Hoekstra; Jaap Oosterlaan; Michael C Stevens; J Antoni Ramos-Quiroga; Oscar Vilarroya; Damien A Fair; Joel T Nigg; Paul M Thompson; Jan K Buitelaar; Stephen V Faraone; Philip Shaw; Henning Tiemeier; Janita Bralten; Barbara Franke Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2019-04-24 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: C D Ladouceur; B S G Molina; A Versace; N P Jones; H M Joseph; R A Lindstrom; T K Wilson; J P Lima Santos; E M Gnagy; W E Pelham Journal: Mol Psychiatry Date: 2021-05-25 Impact factor: 15.992
Authors: Jeffry R Alger; Joseph O'Neill; Mary J O'Connor; Guldamla Kalender; Ronald Ly; Andrea Ng; Andrea Dillon; Katherine L Narr; Sandra K Loo; Jennifer G Levitt Journal: Neurotox Res Date: 2021-03-22 Impact factor: 3.978
Authors: Luke J Hearne; Hsiang-Yuan Lin; Paula Sanz-Leon; Wen-Yih Isaac Tseng; Susan Shur-Fen Gau; James A Roberts; Luca Cocchi Journal: Mol Psychiatry Date: 2019-10-31 Impact factor: 15.992