| Literature DB >> 31671321 |
Leighton R Barnden1, Zack Y Shan2, Donald R Staines3, Sonya Marshall-Gradisnik4, Kevin Finegan5, Timothy Ireland6, Sandeep Bhuta7.
Abstract
In myalgic encephalomyelitis or chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), abnormal MRI correlations with symptom severity and autonomic measures have suggested impaired nerve signal conduction within the brainstem. Here we analyse fMRI correlations to directly test connectivity within and from the brainstem. Resting and task functional MRI (fMRI) were acquired for 45 ME/CFS (Fukuda criteria) and 27 healthy controls (HC). We selected limited brainstem reticular activation system (RAS) regions-of-interest (ROIs) based on previous structural MRI findings in a different ME/CFS cohort (bilateral rostral medulla and midbrain cuneiform nucleus), the dorsal Raphe nucleus, and two subcortical ROIs (hippocampus subiculum and thalamus intralaminar nucleus) reported to have rich brainstem connections. When HC and ME/CFS were analysed separately, significant correlations were detected for both groups during both rest and task, with stronger correlations during task than rest. In ME/CFS, connections were absent between medulla and midbrain nuclei, although hippocampal connections with these nuclei were enhanced. When corresponding correlations from HC and ME/CFS were compared, ME/CFS connectivity deficits were detected within the brainstem between the medulla and cuneiform nucleus and between the brainstem and hippocampus and intralaminar thalamus, but only during task. In CFS/ME, weaker connectivity between some RAS nuclei was associated with increased symptom severity. RAS neuron oscillatory signals facilitate coherence in thalamo-cortical oscillations. Brainstem RAS connectivity deficits can explain autonomic changes and diminish cortical oscillatory coherence which can impair attention, memory, cognitive function, sleep quality and muscle tone, all symptoms of ME/CFS.Entities:
Keywords: Brainstem; Chronic fatigue syndrome; Coherent; Connectivity; Cuneiform nucleus; Me/cfs; Ras; Rostral medulla
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31671321 PMCID: PMC6835065 DOI: 10.1016/j.nicl.2019.102045
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Neuroimage Clin ISSN: 2213-1582 Impact factor: 4.881
ROIs between which connectivity was assessed. L is Left, R is Right.
| ROI location | laterality | abbreviation | Voxels |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rostral medulla | L&R | Mdul_L, Mdul_R | 123 |
| Cuneiform nucleus / PPN | L&R | CnF_L, CnF_R | 125 |
| Dorsal Raphe nucleus | midline | DoRph | 129 |
| Culmen of cerebellum | L | Culm_L | 123 |
| Subiculum of hippocampus | L&R | hippo_L, hippo_R | 377 |
| Intralaminar nucleus of thalamus | L&R | iLam_L, iLam_R | 32 |
Fig. 2Para-midline sagittal sections, after optimised spatial normalization, of the fMRI mean image of 4 subjects (one per row) to illustrate noise and variable signal dropout. Columns from left are for x = −20, −12, −8, −4, 0 mm relative to midline. One of each bilateral ROI (left side) and the midline dorsal Raphe ROI are labelled in the top row (hippo: hippocampus subiculum, Culm: culmen, CnF: cuneiform nucleus, Mdul: rostral medulla, iLam: thalamus intralaminar nucleus, DoRph: dorsal Raphe nucleus). The edge voxels are within the ROI. Note on the midline at right, the variable distortion / signal loss on the ventral surface of the brainstem while the dorsal surface is relatively well-preserved. Note also signal dropout near the hypothalamus.
Fig. 1The Brainstem + Diencephalon mask used to optimise brainstem spatial normalization shown on the T2 template. The mask excludes the ventral medulla and pons where serious signal dropout and distortion was seen in some fMRI images.
For rest and task fMRI, for HC and CFS groups, the group T statistic for the test that Z for each pair of ROIs differed from zero. T are listed for 33/45 pairs from 10 ROIs. All other pairs were insignificant. T are shown for both groups when, for either group, correlation p-FDR < 0.05. The bottom row is the number of significant connections for each group.
| ROI 1 | ROI 2 | rest | Task | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HC | CFS | HC | CFS | CFS | ||
| N | 24 | 39 | 26 | 44 | 26 | |
| Mdul_L | Mdul_R | 10.2 | 14 | 18 | 17 | 13 |
| CnF_L | 3.8* | −1.1† | ||||
| DoRph | 0.4† | 2.3 | 1.8† | |||
| Culm_L | 2.4 | 3.3 | 2.5 | |||
| hippo_L | 2.3 | 2.9 | 3.6 | 3.0 | 2.7 | |
| hippo_R | 2.4 | 4.1 | 1.6† | 4.0 | 4.0 | |
| Mdul_R | CnF_L | 4.3* | −0.6† | |||
| Culm_L | 2.6 | 2.7 | 2.1† | |||
| hippo_L | 4.7* | 2.0† | 1.4† | |||
| hippo_R | 1.6† | 3.9 | 2.4 | 3.1 | 1.8† | |
| CnF_L | CnF_R | 1.6† | 4.8 | 2.2 | 3.5 | 3.1 |
| DoRph | 2.1 | 4.9 | 3.5 | 4.1 | 3.5 | |
| Culm_L | 3.3 | 1.8† | ||||
| hippo_L | 3.4 | 3.9 | 4.0 | 4.3 | 3.0 | |
| hippo_R | 2.5 | 2.2 | 2.1 | |||
| iLam_L | 1.3† | 2.5 | ||||
| CnF_R | DoRph | 3.4 | 4.0 | 4.0 | 4.8 | 4.2 |
| Culm_L | 2.5 | 1.5† | ||||
| hippo_L | 3.2 | 4.3 | 1.4† | 4.7 | 3.3 | |
| hippo_R | 2.2 | 3.5 | 0.9† | 4.3 | 3.2 | |
| iLam_R | 2.4 | 0.2† | ||||
| DoRph | Culm_L | 3.5 | 3.1 | 2.2 | 3.8 | 4.1 |
| hippo_L | 0.9† | 3.1 | 2.7 | 3.1 | 2.3 | |
| hippo_R | 2.4 | 4.3 | 2.1 | 4.5 | 3.4 | |
| iLam_L | 1.6† | 2.5 | 2.6 | 0.6† | ||
| iLam_R | 3.2* | 0.2† | 0.02† | |||
| Culm_L | hippo_L | 3.9 | 3.9 | 4.5 | 2.9 | 1.1† |
| hippo_R | 1.5† | 3.2 | 2.2† | 3.7 | 2.6 | |
| hippo_L | hippo_R | 6.1 | 11.2 | 7.0 | 9.4 | 6.7 |
| iLam_L | 0.9† | 3.1 | 2.4 | |||
| iLam_R | 2.7 | 1.3† | ||||
| hippo_R | iLam_L | 1.9† | 2.1 | 1.8† | ||
| iLam_L | iLam_R | 3.5 | 2.7† | 1.0† | 3.7 | 3.7 |
| significant connections | 15 | 18 | 24 | 23 | 18 | |
*flags correlations with significantly impaired CFS connectivity (Table 3).,
†flags insignificant group correlation.
For the task fMRI, the T and p–FDR (false discovery rate corrected) statistics for HC connectivity greater than ME/CFS connectivity for ROI pairs within the brainstem (top 2 rows) and between ROIs in the brainstem and two subcortical ROIs. See Table 1 for abbreviations.
| ROI 1 | ROI 2 | T | p-FDR |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mdul_R | CnF_L | 4.2 | .0009 |
| Mdul_L | CnF_L | 3.6 | .003 |
| Mdul_R | hippo_L | 3.2 | .01 |
| DoRph | iLam_R | 3.0 | .03 |
Fig. 3Connectogram summary of significant connectivity for the healthy control (HC) and ME/chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) groups during Rest and Task fMRI. All correlations were positive. In CFS there were no Mdul - CnF connections. Connectivity for joined ROIs was significant with p_FDR < 0.05. Line width and color encode the T statistic for non-zero group connectivity. The grey arcs highlight the brainstem midbrain (left) and medulla (right) nodes.
Fig. 4Distribution of ME/CFS functional connectivity deficits relative to HC. All were significant with p-FDR < 0.05. Two pairs of ROIs (Mdul_L to CnF_L and Mdul_R to CnF_L) were located within the brainstem and showed the strongest deficits (Table 3). The other two pairs had one ROI within the brainstem. See Table 1 for abbreviations.
Significant (p-FDR < 0.05) regressions between CFS brainstem connectivity during task vs CFS severity regressor. The 1 s column lists the single group (CFS) regressions and 2 s shows the one interaction-with-group (opposite CFS and HC regression) significant result. Regressors physSF36 and mentSF36 refer to the SF36 physical and SF36 mental summary scores.
| ROI 1 | ROI 2 | regressor | 1s | 2s |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| hippo_R | Mdul_L | physSF36 | 0.040 | |
| hippo_L | Culm_L | mentSF36 | 0.034 | |
| hippo_L | iLam_R | mentSF36 | 0.038 |