| Literature DB >> 33247213 |
Dimitris F Sakellariou1,2, Sofia Dall'Orso3, Etienne Burdet3, Jean-Pierre Lin4, Mark P Richardson1, Verity M McClelland5,6.
Abstract
We investigated modulation of functional neuronal connectivity by a proprioceptive stimulus in sixteen young people with dystonia and eight controls. A robotic wrist interface delivered controlled passive wrist extension movements, the onset of which was synchronised with scalp EEG recordings. Data were segmented into epochs around the stimulus and up to 160 epochs per subject were averaged to produce a Stretch Evoked Potential (StretchEP). Event-related network dynamics were estimated using a methodology that features Wavelet Transform Coherency (WTC). Global Microscale Nodal Strength (GMNS) was introduced to estimate overall engagement of areas into short-lived networks related to the StretchEP, and Global Connectedness (GC) estimated the spatial extent of the StretchEP networks. Dynamic Connectivity Maps showed a striking difference between dystonia and controls, with particularly strong theta band event-related connectivity in dystonia. GC also showed a trend towards higher values in dystonia than controls. In summary, we demonstrate the feasibility of this method to investigate event-related neuronal connectivity in relation to a proprioceptive stimulus in a paediatric patient population. Young people with dystonia show an exaggerated network response to a proprioceptive stimulus, displaying both excessive theta-band synchronisation across the sensorimotor network and widespread engagement of cortical regions in the activated network.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33247213 PMCID: PMC7695825 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-77533-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Details of patients with dystonia.
| Subject number | Age | Dystonia classification | Aetiology of dystonia | Phenotype | Dominant hand | BFMDRS-m | DBS | Global microscale nodal strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 8 | Isolated genetic | DYT1 | Generalised dystonia, frequent falls | R | 57 | N | 0.0003 |
| 2 | 9 | Isolated genetic | DYT1 | Generalised dystonia | R | 47 | N | 0.0087 |
| 3 | 10 | Isolated genetic | DYT1 | Generalised dystonia: initial craniocervical onset involving mouth opening and retrocollis followed by gait disturbance | R | 38 | Y | 0.0203 |
| 4 | 11 | Isolated genetic | DYT1 | Generalised dystonia | R | 52 | N | 0.0015 |
| 5 | 11 | Isolated genetic | DYT1 | Generalised dystonia | R | N | 0.008 | |
| 6 | 12 | Isolated genetic | DYT11 | Generalised dystonia with myoclonus | R | 34.5 | N | 0.0110 |
| 7 | 16 | Isolated genetic | DYT11 | Generalised dystonia with myoclonus | R | 20 | Y | 0.0033 |
| 8 | 7 | Isolated genetic | KMT2B | Generalised movement disorder with both sustained dystonic postures and more hyperkinetic movments | R | 46.5 | N | 0.0338 |
| 9 | 13 | Isolated genetic | KMT2B | Generalised dystonia with dystonic tremor and possible Parkinsonian features | R | 72 | Y | 0.0000 |
| 10 | 15 | Isolated genetic | KMT2B | Generalised dystonia. Started in lower limbs, then arms and hand and progressing to involve jaw and speech | R | 66 | N | 0.0033 |
| 11 | 20 | Isolated genetic | KMT2B | Generalised dystonic choreoathetosis with possible myoclonic elements | R | 72 | Y | 0.0059 |
| 12 | 11 | Idiopathic | Idiopathic | Generalised but predominantly lower limb dystonia | R | 24 | N | 0.0081 |
| 13 | 5 | Acquired | Cerebral palsy due to term HIE | Generalised dystonia affecting predominantly left arm and both legs, with typical action dystonia | R | 60 | N | 0.1358 |
| 14 | 17 | Acquired | Cerebral palsy due to term HIE | Generalised dystonia with action specific dystonic tremor more marked with manual activities than gross motor skills. Dystonic dysarthria | L | 27 | Y | 0.0236 |
| 15 | 7 | Acquired | Cerebral palsy due to prematurity | Mixed movement disorder with features of dystonia and chorea | L | N | 0.01 | |
| 16 | 15 | Acquired | Cerebral palsy due to prematurity | Generalised movement disorder with mixed dystonia and spasticity. Lower limbs most affected | L | N | 0.0032 |
HIE hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy, BFMDRS-m Burke–Fahn–Marsden Dystonia Rating Scale motor score, DBS deep brain stimulation.
Figure 1Top row: portable Hi5 interface for human motor control studies. (A) Design overview: the interface can be used with various handles and end effectors. (B) User interacting with Hi5 attached to a table-top. From Wilhelm et al.[35]. Line drawings kindly provided by Ildar Farkhatdinov. Bottom row: single subject data. (C) Movement profile of wrist extension in degrees from neutral position over time (ms). Each grey line shows the movement profile for an individual data epoch with the red line showing the mean. Produced with Python 3.7.2, matplotlib 3.1.0. (D) Cortical evoked potential recorded over contralateral sensorimotor cortex (in this case over CP5 electrode during right wrist movement). Figure shows average of 137 epochs, processed using BrainVision Analyser (Version 2.2; https://www.brainproducts.com).
Figure 2Network comparisons between example control (left) and patient (right) subjects, using data from two individual subjects, each representative of their respective subject group. Top row: subject-specific dynamic connectivity maps showing synchronisation values between all possible pairs of EEG electrodes for a typical control (A1) and participant with dystonia (A2). Electrodes are shown in X–Y axes and connection strength between x–y pairs of electrodes is indicated in cold (low) and warm (high) colours. The connectivity for a pair of electrodes is estimated over the time and frequency domains (x and y axis of subgraphs respectively) allowing for the characterisation of microscale network dynamics around an EEG event (t = 0 s), here the StretchEP. Arrows indicate the relative lag of significant connectivities for each pair of electrodes (right-horizontal: Δφ = 0, upward-vertical: Δφ = π/2, etc.). Upward and downward direction of arrows indicate flow of information from the electrode on the Y-axis towards the one in X-axis and vice versa. An expanded section is shown for an example electrode pair (Fz–F3) in each subject. Differences between the control and patient subjects in the connectivity values inside the subgraph boxes are evident and are further quantified in the network representations, in the second row. Produced with MATLAB 2018b and Neurocraft 1.0.0. Second row: network simulations. Theta-band connections of the peri-SEP networks are depicted in grey edges. The degrees (i.e. number of connections) for each EEG area/electrode are expressed in blue (least connections) to red (most connections). The positioning of the nodes was determined according to force-directed placement for undirected graphs, to reflect centrality features of the system[48]. The network simulations for the control (B1) and participant with dystonia (B2) reveal organisational dissimilarities that reflect differences in the number of areas that do not get involved in the network and more importantly significant differences in weighted degrees, as shown analytically in the bottom row. Produced with MATLAB 2018b and d3.js v5.16.0. Third row: anatomical representation of network patterns in the EEG space (C1 control, C2 participant with dystonia). Connection strengths are represented in thickness of links between areas and are scaled per subject from zero to one. EEG areas absent from the functional networks are not displayed in the graphs. Produced with “Easy Plot EEG Brain Network” (https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/fileexchange/57372-easy-plot-eeg-brain-network-matlab). Bottom row: nodal ranking according to weighted degrees i.e. sum of connectivity values across all existing connections (D1 control, D2 participant with dystonia). Produced with MATLAB 2018b and Neurocraft 1.0.0.
Figure 3Global microscale nodal strength (GMNS) group differences. Split violin plots with inverted kernel densities and data points, exhibiting significant differences between the control and patient groups. Patients with DBS are denoted with asterisks. Produced with R 3.6.0 and ggplot 3.3.2.
Figure 4Global connectedness group differences. Violin plots with inverted kernel densities and data points. The patient group exhibits the tendency to “recruit” more EEG areas in response to SEP events, which is less consistent for the control group, but the difference is not statistically significant. Produced with R 3.6.0 and ggplot 3.3.2.