Liyan Lu1, Juan Zhang2, Fengfang Li1, Song'an Shang1, Huiyou Chen1, Xindao Yin1, Wei Gao3, Yu-Chen Chen4. 1. Department of Radiology, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, No.68, Changle Road, 210006, Nanjing, China. 2. Department of Neurology, Nanjing Yuhua Hospital, Yuhua Branch of Nanjing First Hospital, 210006, Nanjing, China. 3. Department of Radiology, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, No.68, Changle Road, 210006, Nanjing, China. gao1974@yeah.net. 4. Department of Radiology, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, No.68, Changle Road, 210006, Nanjing, China. chenyuchen1989@126.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate differences in static and dynamic functional network connectivity (FNC) and explore their association with neurocognitive performance in acute mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). METHODS: A total of 76 patients with acute mTBI and 70 age-matched and sex-matched healthy controls were enrolled (age 43.79 ± 10.22 years vs. 45.63 ± 9.49 years; male/female: 34/42 vs. 38/32; all p > 0.05) and underwent resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scan (repetition time/echo time = 2000/30 ms, 230 volumes). Independent component analysis was conducted to evaluate static and dynamic FNC patterns on the basis of nine resting-state networks, namely, auditory network (AUDN), dorsal attention network (dAN), ventral attention network (vAN), default mode network (DMN), left frontoparietal network (LFPN), right frontoparietal network (RFPN), somatomotor network (SMN), visual network (VN), and salience network (SN). Spearman's correlation among aberrances in FNC values, and Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA) scores was further measured in mTBI. RESULTS: Compared with controls, patients with mTBI showed wide aberrances of static FNC, such as reduced FNC in DMN-vAN and VN-vAN pairs. The mTBI patients exhibited aberrant dynamic FNC in state 2, involving reduced FNC aberrance in the vAN with AUDN, VN with DMN and dAN, and SN with SMN and vAN. Reduced dFNC in the SN-vAN pair was negatively correlated with the MoCA score. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that aberrant static and dynamic FNC at the acute stage may contribute to cognitive symptoms, which not only may expand knowledge regarding FNC cognition relations from the static perspective but also from the dynamic perspective.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate differences in static and dynamic functional network connectivity (FNC) and explore their association with neurocognitive performance in acute mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). METHODS: A total of 76 patients with acute mTBI and 70 age-matched and sex-matched healthy controls were enrolled (age 43.79 ± 10.22 years vs. 45.63 ± 9.49 years; male/female: 34/42 vs. 38/32; all p > 0.05) and underwent resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scan (repetition time/echo time = 2000/30 ms, 230 volumes). Independent component analysis was conducted to evaluate static and dynamic FNC patterns on the basis of nine resting-state networks, namely, auditory network (AUDN), dorsal attention network (dAN), ventral attention network (vAN), default mode network (DMN), left frontoparietal network (LFPN), right frontoparietal network (RFPN), somatomotor network (SMN), visual network (VN), and salience network (SN). Spearman's correlation among aberrances in FNC values, and Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA) scores was further measured in mTBI. RESULTS: Compared with controls, patients with mTBI showed wide aberrances of static FNC, such as reduced FNC in DMN-vAN and VN-vAN pairs. The mTBI patients exhibited aberrant dynamic FNC in state 2, involving reduced FNC aberrance in the vAN with AUDN, VN with DMN and dAN, and SN with SMN and vAN. Reduced dFNC in the SN-vAN pair was negatively correlated with the MoCA score. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that aberrant static and dynamic FNC at the acute stage may contribute to cognitive symptoms, which not only may expand knowledge regarding FNC cognition relations from the static perspective but also from the dynamic perspective.
Authors: Armin Iraji; Randall R Benson; Robert D Welch; Brian J O'Neil; John L Woodard; Syed Imran Ayaz; Andrew Kulek; Valerie Mika; Patrick Medado; Hamid Soltanian-Zadeh; Tianming Liu; E Mark Haacke; Zhifeng Kou Journal: J Neurotrauma Date: 2015-03-06 Impact factor: 5.269
Authors: Yongxia Zhou; Michael P Milham; Yvonne W Lui; Laura Miles; Joseph Reaume; Daniel K Sodickson; Robert I Grossman; Yulin Ge Journal: Radiology Date: 2012-12 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Elena A Allen; Eswar Damaraju; Sergey M Plis; Erik B Erhardt; Tom Eichele; Vince D Calhoun Journal: Cereb Cortex Date: 2012-11-11 Impact factor: 5.357
Authors: Amy E Ramage; Kimberly L Ray; Hannah M Franz; David F Tate; Jeffrey D Lewis; Donald A Robin Journal: Front Hum Neurosci Date: 2022-02-10 Impact factor: 3.169
Authors: Adam C Raikes; Gerson D Hernandez; Veronica A Mullins; Yiwei Wang; Claudia Lopez; William D S Killgore; Floyd H Chilton; Roberta D Brinton Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2022-09-15 Impact factor: 4.086