| Literature DB >> 29740269 |
Olena G Filatova1,2, Lucas J van Vliet2, Alfred C Schouten1,3, Gert Kwakkel4, Frans C T van der Helm1, Frans M Vos2,5.
Abstract
Better insight into white matter (WM) alterations after stroke onset could help to understand the underlying recovery mechanisms and improve future interventions. MR diffusion imaging enables to assess such changes. Our goal was to investigate the relation of WM diffusion characteristics derived from diffusion models of increasing complexity with the motor function of the upper limb. Moreover, we aimed to evaluate the variation of such characteristics across different WM structures of chronic stroke patients in comparison to healthy subjects. Subjects were scanned with a two b-value diffusion-weighted MRI protocol to exploit multiple diffusion models: single tensor, single tensor with isotropic compartment, bi-tensor model, bi-tensor with isotropic compartment. From each model we derived the mean tract fractional anisotropy (FA), mean (MD), radial (RD) and axial (AD) diffusivities outside the lesion site based on a WM tracts atlas. Asymmetry of these measures was correlated with the Fugl-Meyer upper extremity assessment (FMA) score and compared between patient and control groups. Eighteen chronic stroke patients and eight age-matched healthy individuals participated in the study. Significant correlation of the outcome measures with the clinical scores of stroke recovery was found. The lowest correlation of the corticospinal tract FAasymmetry and FMA was with the single tensor model (r = -0.3, p = 0.2) whereas the other models reported results in the range of r = -0.79 ÷ -0.81 and p = 4E-5 ÷ 8E-5. The corticospinal tract and superior longitudinal fasciculus showed most alterations in our patient group relative to controls. Multiple compartment models yielded superior correlation of the diffusion measures and FMA compared to the single tensor model.Entities:
Keywords: anatomic lateralization; brain; diffusion MRI; diffusion tensor imaging/methods; motor performance; rehabilitation outcomes; stroke
Year: 2018 PMID: 29740269 PMCID: PMC5925961 DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2018.00247
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurosci ISSN: 1662-453X Impact factor: 4.677
Figure 1Overview of the analysis steps starting with the pre-processed dMR images. A diffusion tensor model is fitted to the data (four different diffusion models were used in this study). Masks excluding the subject-specific lesion site are created based on the thresholded isotropic compartment of the bi-tensor model with isotropic compartment. The results of this step are registered to the white-matter tract atlas (https://neurovault.org/media/images/264/JHU-ICBM-tracts-maxprob-thr25-1mm.nii.gz) and mean values of the outcome parameters are calculated for each tract.
Figure 2Illustration of the four diffusion models. From left to right: single tensor, single tensor with isotropic compartment, bi-tensor and bi-tensor with an isotropic compartment models.
White matter tracts of the JHU tractography atlas obtained from deterministic tractography on 28 normal subjects (https://neurovault.org/media/images/264/JHU-ICBM-tracts-maxprob-thr25-1mm.nii.gz, Hua et al., 2008), their approximate location and function.
| Anterior thalamic radiation (ATR) | Passes from thalamus to pre-frontal cortex | As a part of thalamic radiations, relays sensory and motor data to pre- and post-central cortex |
| Corticospinal tract (CST) | Connects cerebral motor and somatosensory cortex to medulla and descends into contralateral spinal cord | Facilitates voluntary motor control of the limbs and trunk |
| Cingulum (all parts): Cingulum 1 -cingulate gyrus (CG); cingulum 2–cingulate hippocampus (CH) | A collection of WM fibers connecting cingulate gyrus (cortex) to the entorhinal cortex | Part of the limbic system of the brain, associated with emotion, visual and spatial skills, working and general memory |
| Inferior fronto-occipital fasciculus (IFOF) | Connects the occipital lobe with the anterior part of the temporal lobe, running medially and above the optic fibers. It is a direct pathway connecting occipital, posterior temporal orbitofrontal areas | Integration of auditory and visual association cortices with prefrontal cortex. Function is still poorly understood |
| Inferior longitudinal fasciculus (ILF) | Connects the occipital lobe with the anterior part of the temporal lobe, running above the optic radiation fibers | Integration of auditory and speech nuclei. Function is still poorly understood |
| Superior longitudinal fasciculus (all parts): SLF and temporal part SLF-T | Major association fiber tract connecting frontal, parietal, and temporal lobes | As a major tract with projections to multiple lobes, it is involved with regulating motor behavior, spatial attention, visual and oculomotor functions, transfer of somatosensory information as well as language |
| Uncinate fasciculus | A hook-shaped fiber bundle linking anterior parts of the temporal lobe with the lower surface of the frontal lobe | Part of the limbic system which takes part in memory integration |
Figure 3FA image of an affected hemisphere of a patient before (subject space, left) and after (atlas space, right) registration to the atlas space. Lesion mask was applied. The absence of large deformations indicates that the presence of the lesion hardly affected the registration outcome.
Median and IQR over the study population of the considered regions of interest after masking lesions out, computed in the atlas space.
| Anterior thalamic radiation | 11716 (9928.5–12588) | 10776 (7265.25–11320.75) |
| Corticospinal tract | 8867 (8451.75–9057.5) | 7991.5 (7302.75–8106.75) |
| Cingulum (all parts) | 5021 (4992.75–5053.75) | 3781.5 (3721.75–3792.75) |
| Inferior fronto-occipital fasciculus | 11018 (10587.25–11097.5) | 12036 (10976–12134,5) |
| Inferior longitudinal fasciculus | 10359.5 (10314–10400) | 6964 (6790.5–7004.25) |
| Superior longitudinal fasciculus (all parts) | 14977.5 (14862.5–15017.5) | 11881.5 (11186.75–11909.75) |
| Uncinate fasciculus | 2627 (2551.5–2650.75) | 1775.5 (1605–1810) |
Names and order of ROIs coincides with Table .
Figure 4Correlation of the FMA score and asymmetry in (A) FA (top left), (B) MD (top right), (C) AD (bottom left), and (D) RD (bottom right) for the considered WM tracts. Statistically significant correlations (p < 0.05) are depicted in blue, not significant correlations are shown in red. Models are denoted as follows: single tensor—square, single tensor with isotropic compartment—diamond, bi-tensor—triangle, bi-tensor with isotropic compartment—star. Horizontal dashed lines mark conditional boundaries of moderate (negative) linear relation (correlation of ±0.5), solid lines—strong relation (correlation of ±0.7).
Figure 5Comparison of the (A) FA (top left), (B) MD (top right), (C) AD (bottom left), and (D) RD (bottom right) asymmetries in the WM tracts between patients and controls (range indicated in black) estimated by the four diffusion models. Results for patients are color-coded with their FMA score. Models from left to right for each tract: single tensor (square), single tensor with isotropic compartment (diamond), bi-tensor (triangle), bi-tensor with isotropic compartment (star). Filled bullets at the top of each data series mark the tracts and models for which, after Benjamini–Hochberg correction, the asymmetry of patients is significantly different from the one of controls.