Literature DB >> 32091959

Auditory Feedback Control Mechanisms Do Not Contribute to Cortical Hyperactivity Within the Voice Production Network in Adductor Spasmodic Dysphonia.

Ayoub Daliri1,2, Elizabeth S Heller Murray1, Anne J Blood3, James Burns3, J Pieter Noordzij4, Alfonso Nieto-Castanon1, Jason A Tourville1, Frank H Guenther1.   

Abstract

Purpose Adductor spasmodic dysphonia (ADSD), the most common form of spasmodic dysphonia, is a debilitating voice disorder characterized by hyperactivity and muscle spasms in the vocal folds during speech. Prior neuroimaging studies have noted excessive brain activity during speech in participants with ADSD compared to controls. Speech involves an auditory feedback control mechanism that generates motor commands aimed at eliminating disparities between desired and actual auditory signals. Thus, excessive neural activity in ADSD during speech may reflect, at least in part, increased engagement of the auditory feedback control mechanism as it attempts to correct vocal production errors detected through audition. Method To test this possibility, functional magnetic resonance imaging was used to identify differences between participants with ADSD (n = 12) and age-matched controls (n = 12) in (a) brain activity when producing speech under different auditory feedback conditions and (b) resting-state functional connectivity within the cortical network responsible for vocalization. Results As seen in prior studies, the ADSD group had significantly higher activity than the control group during speech with normal auditory feedback (compared to a silent baseline task) in three left-hemisphere cortical regions: ventral Rolandic (sensorimotor) cortex, anterior planum temporale, and posterior superior temporal gyrus/planum temporale. Importantly, this same pattern of hyperactivity was also found when auditory feedback control of speech was eliminated through masking noise. Furthermore, the ADSD group had significantly higher resting-state functional connectivity between sensorimotor and auditory cortical regions within the left hemisphere as well as between the left and right hemispheres. Conclusions Together, our results indicate that hyperactivation in the cortical speech network of individuals with ADSD does not result from hyperactive auditory feedback control mechanisms and rather is likely related to impairments in somatosensory feedback control and/or feedforward control mechanisms.

Entities:  

Year:  2020        PMID: 32091959      PMCID: PMC7210444          DOI: 10.1044/2019_JSLHR-19-00325

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res        ISSN: 1092-4388            Impact factor:   2.297


  47 in total

Review 1.  Computational neuroanatomy of speech production.

Authors:  Gregory Hickok
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2012-01-05       Impact factor: 34.870

2.  Conn: a functional connectivity toolbox for correlated and anticorrelated brain networks.

Authors:  Susan Whitfield-Gabrieli; Alfonso Nieto-Castanon
Journal:  Brain Connect       Date:  2012-07-19

3.  "Silent event-related" fMRI reveals reduced sensorimotor activation in laryngeal dystonia.

Authors:  B Haslinger; P Erhard; C Dresel; F Castrop; M Roettinger; A O Ceballos-Baumann
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2005-11-22       Impact factor: 9.910

Review 4.  Structural, functional and molecular imaging of the brain in primary focal dystonia--a review.

Authors:  E Zoons; J Booij; A J Nederveen; J M Dijk; M A J Tijssen
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2011-02-22       Impact factor: 6.556

5.  Nipype: a flexible, lightweight and extensible neuroimaging data processing framework in python.

Authors:  Krzysztof Gorgolewski; Christopher D Burns; Cindee Madison; Dav Clark; Yaroslav O Halchenko; Michael L Waskom; Satrajit S Ghosh
Journal:  Front Neuroinform       Date:  2011-08-22       Impact factor: 4.081

6.  Alterations in CNS activity induced by botulinum toxin treatment in spasmodic dysphonia: an H215O PET study.

Authors:  S Omar Ali; Michael Thomassen; Geralyn M Schulz; Lara A Hosey; Mary Varga; Christy L Ludlow; Allen R Braun
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 2.297

7.  Cortical sensorimotor alterations classify clinical phenotype and putative genotype of spasmodic dysphonia.

Authors:  G Battistella; S Fuertinger; L Fleysher; L J Ozelius; K Simonyan
Journal:  Eur J Neurol       Date:  2016-06-27       Impact factor: 6.089

8.  Neural correlates of dystonic tremor: a multimodal study of voice tremor in spasmodic dysphonia.

Authors:  Diana N Kirke; Giovanni Battistella; Veena Kumar; Estee Rubien-Thomas; Melissa Choy; Anna Rumbach; Kristina Simonyan
Journal:  Brain Imaging Behav       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 3.978

9.  The sensory consequences of speaking: parametric neural cancellation during speech in auditory cortex.

Authors:  Ingrid K Christoffels; Vincent van de Ven; Lourens J Waldorp; Elia Formisano; Niels O Schiller
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-05-19       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  An Investigation of Compensation and Adaptation to Auditory Perturbations in Individuals With Acquired Apraxia of Speech.

Authors:  Kirrie J Ballard; Mark Halaki; Paul Sowman; Alise Kha; Ayoub Daliri; Donald A Robin; Jason A Tourville; Frank H Guenther
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2018-12-19       Impact factor: 3.169

View more
  3 in total

1.  Temporal specificity of abnormal neural oscillations during phonatory events in laryngeal dystonia.

Authors:  Hardik Kothare; Sarah Schneider; Danielle Mizuiri; Leighton Hinkley; Abhishek Bhutada; Kamalini Ranasinghe; Susanne Honma; Coleman Garrett; David Klein; Molly Naunheim; Katherine Yung; Steven Cheung; Clark Rosen; Mark Courey; Srikantan Nagarajan; John Houde
Journal:  Brain Commun       Date:  2022-02-11

2.  Compensatory Responses to Formant Perturbations Proportionally Decrease as Perturbations Increase.

Authors:  Ayoub Daliri; Sara-Ching Chao; Lacee C Fitzgerald
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2020-09-24       Impact factor: 2.297

3.  A Computational Model for Estimating the Speech Motor System's Sensitivity to Auditory Prediction Errors.

Authors:  Ayoub Daliri
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2021-05-27       Impact factor: 2.297

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.