| Literature DB >> 32558355 |
Yu-Xin Liu1, Biao Li1, Kang-Rui Wu1, Li-Ying Tang2, Qi Lin1, Qing-Hai Li1, Qing Yuan1, Wen-Qing Shi1, Rong-Bin Liang1, Qian-Min Ge1, Yi Shao1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Visual deprivation can lead to abnormal and plastic changes in the brain's visual system and other systems. Although the secondary changes of gray matter in patients have been well studied, the study of white matter is rare. In fact, subtle changes in white matter may be revealed by diffusion tensor imaging, and tract-based spatial statistics can be used to analyze DTI image data.Entities:
Keywords: diffusion tensor imaging; monocular blindness; tract-based spatial statistics; white matter
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32558355 PMCID: PMC7428480 DOI: 10.1002/brb3.1720
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Brain Behav Impact factor: 2.708
Conditions of participants included in the study
| Condition | MB | HCs |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male/female | 15/1 | 14/2 | 0.169 | .982 |
| Age (years) | 50.12 ± 5.34 | 51.26 ± 5.76 | 0.282 | .882 |
| Weight (kg) | 65.12 ± 9.81 | 63.89 ± 10.09 | 0.193 | .939 |
| Handedness | 16R | 16R |
| >.99 |
| Duration of DON (days) | 51.24 ± 6.64 |
|
|
|
| Best‐corrected Va‐left eye | 0.95 ± 0.20 | 1.05 ± 0.25 | −0.158 | .928 |
| Best‐corrected Va‐right eye | – | 1.05 ± 015 |
|
|
Abbreviations: HCs, healthy controls; MB: monocular blindness; N/A, not applicable.
p < .05 Independent t tests comparing two groups.
Figure 1Results of whole‐brain tract‐based spatial statistics analysis comparing fractional anisotropy between patients with monocular blindness and healthy controls. Significantly decreased fractional anisotropy values of MB group were shown in the corpus callosum, the right retrolenticular part of internal capsule, the anterior corona radiate, the superior corona radiate, the posterior corona radiate, the posterior thalamic radiation, the right sagittal stratum (right), and the superior longitudinal fasciculus. The skeleton image (green = RD > 0.2) was overlaid by the mean fractional anisotropy image. HC, healthy controls; MB, monocular blindness
Clusters showing significant differences in RD between patients and HCs
| Variable | Comparison | TFCE corrected | Cluster number/size | MNI atlas coordinates | Tract(s) with in clusters | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |||||
| RD | HCs < Patients | <0.01 | 1/158 | 73 | 108 | 107 | Corpus callosum |
| 2/224 | 116 | 66 | 86 |
Posterior thalamic radiation(left) Superior corona radiate (right) Posterior corona radiata (right) | |||
| 3/121 | 128 | 79 | 66 | Sagittal stratum | |||
| 4/98 | 128 | 76 | 93 | Superior longitudinal fasciculus (left) | |||
The statistical threshold was set at voxel level with p < .05 for multiple comparisons using Gaussian random field theory voxels with p < .01 and cluster size > 40 voxels, AlphaSim corrected.
Abbreviations: FA, fractional anisotropy; HCs, healthy controls; MNI, Montreal Neurological Institute; RD, radial diffusivity; TFCE corrected p, Threshold‐Free Cluster Enhancement corrected p value.
Figure 2Comparison of radial diffusivity in patients with monocular blindness and healthy controls. The statistically significant clusters are presented at different coordinates in these parts: the corpus callosum, the left posterior thalamic radiation, the right superior corona radiate, the right posterior corona radiate, the sagittal stratum, and the left superior longitudinal fasciculus. And the red areas indicate all tracts with significantly increased RD values in the MB group, which may reflect abnormal white matter integrity (p < .05). HCs, healthy controls; MB, monocular blindness; RD, radial diffusivity
Figure 3ROC curve analysis of the mean FA and RD values for altered brain regions. (a) The area under the ROC curve of the FA values was 0.876 (p < .001; 95% CI: 0.741–1.000) for GCC, BCC 0.871 (p < .001; 95% CI: 0.733–1.000), SCC 0.959 (p < .001; 95% CI: 0.893–1.000), RSCR 0.929 (p < .001; 95% CI: 0.827–1.000), RPCR 0.856 (p > .05; 95% CI: 0.712–1.000), LPTR 0.982 (p < .001; 95% CI: 0.944–1.000). RSS, 0.959 (p < .001; 95% CI: 0.891–1.000), LSS, 0.959 (p < .001; 95% CI: 0.876–1.000), LSLF, 0.924 (p < .001; 95% CI: 0.814–1.000). (b) The area under the ROC curve of the RD values was 0.894 (p < .001; 95% CI: 0.766–1.000) for GCC, BCC 0.882 (p < .001; 95% CI: 0.755–1.000), SCC 0.935 (p < .001; 95% CI: 0.846–1.000), RRPIC 0.924 (p < .001; 95% CI: 0.823–1.000), RACR 0.794 (p < .001; 95% CI: 0.624–0.964), LACR 0.853 (p < .001; 95% CI: 0.697–1.000), RSCR 0.935 (p < .001; 95% CI: 0.841–1.000), LSCR 0.876 (p < .001; 95% CI: 0.740–1.000), RPCR 0.888 (p < .001; 95% CI: 0.761–1.000), LPCR 0.853 (p < .001; 95% CI: 0.711–0.995), RPTR 0.941 (p < .001; 95% CI: 0.850–1.000), LPTR 0.971 (p < .001; 95% CI: 0.917–1.000), RSS 0.965 (p < .001; 95% CI: 0.904–1.000), RSLF 0.794 (p < .001; 95% CI: 0.616–0.973), LSLF 0.894 (p < .001; 95% CI: 0.767–1.000). AUC, area under the curve; FA, fractional anisotropy; RD, radial diffusivity; ROC, receiver operating characteristic; GCC, genu of corpus callosum; BCC, body of corpus callosum; SCC, splenium of corpus callosum; RSCR, right superior corona radiata; RPCR, right posterior corona radiata; LPTR, left posterior thalamic radiation; RSS, right sagittal stratum; LSS, left sagittal stratum; LSLF, left superior longitudinal fasciculus; RRPIC, right retrolenticular part of internal capsule; RACR, right anterior corona radiata; LACR, left anterior corona radiata; LSCR, left superior corona radiata; LPCR, left posterior corona radiata; RPTR, right posterior thalamic radiation; RSLF, right superior longitudinal fasciculus
Clusters showing significant differences in FA between patients and HCs
| Variable | Comparison | TFCE corrected | Cluster Number/size | MNI atlas coordinates | Tract(s) with in clusters | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |||||
| FA | HCs > Patients | <0.01 | 1/292 | 117 | 101 | 63 |
Corpus callosum Retrolenticular part of internal capsule (right) Anterior corona radiata Superior corona radiata Posterior corona radiata Posterior thalamic radiation Sagittal stratum (right) Superior longitudinal fasciculus |
The statistical threshold was set at voxel level with p < .05 for multiple comparisons using Gaussian random field theory voxels with p < .01 and cluster size > 40 voxels, AlphaSim corrected.
Abbreviations: FA, fractional anisotropy; HCs, healthy controls; MNI, Montreal Neurological Institute; TFCE corrected p, Threshold‐Free Cluster Enhancement corrected p value.
Figure 4Correlation between the average FA (RD) values of the whole brain in MB patients and anxiety, depression, and NEI‐VFQ25 scores. (a) The FA value was positively correlated with anxiety score (r = .911, p < .0001). (b) The FA value was positively correlated with depression score (r = .873, p < .0001). (c) The FA value was negatively correlated with NEI‐VQF25 score (r = −.842, p < .0001). (d) The RD value showed a negative correlation with anxiety score (r = −.879, p < .0001). (e) The average RD value of the whole brain showed a negative correlation with depression score (r = −.875, p < .0001). (f) The RD value showed a positive correlation with NEI‐VQF25 score (r = −.842, p < .0001). FA, fractional anisotropy; RD, radial diffusivity; NEI‐VFQ25, 25‐item National