| Literature DB >> 35132408 |
Rakibul Hafiz, Tapan Kumar Gandhi, Sapna Mishra, Alok Prasad, Vidur Mahajan, Benjamin H Natelson, Xin Di, Bharat B Biswal.
Abstract
The recent Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected all aspects of life around the world. Neuroimaging evidence suggests the novel coronavirus can attack the central nervous system (CNS), causing cerebro-vascular abnormalities in the brain. This can lead to focal changes in cerebral blood flow and metabolic oxygen consumption rate in the brain. However, the extent and spatial locations of brain alterations in COVID-19 survivors are largely unknown. In this study, we have assessed brain functional connectivity (FC) using resting-state functional MRI (RS-fMRI) in 38 (25 males) COVID patients two weeks after hospital discharge, when PCR negative and 31 (24 males) healthy subjects. FC was estimated using independent component analysis (ICA) and dual regression. The COVID group demonstrated significantly enhanced FC in regions from the Occipital and Parietal Lobes, comparing to the HC group. On the other hand, the COVID group exhibited significantly reduced FC in several vermal layers of the cerebellum. More importantly, we noticed negative correlation of FC with self-reported fatigue within regions from the Parietal lobe, which are known to be associated with fatigue. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Early neuroimaging studies have mostly focused on structural MRI imaging to report brain abnormalities in acutely ill COVID-19 patients. It is not clear whether functional abnormalities co-exist with structural alterations in patients who have survived the infection and have been discharged from the hospital. A few recent studies have emerged which attempted to address the structural/functional alterations. However, further investigations across different sites are necessary for more conclusive inference. More importantly, fatigue is a highly prevalent symptom among COVID survivors, therefore, the relations of brain imaging abnormalities to fatigue should be investigated. In this study, we try to address these gaps, by collecting imaging data from COVID survivors, now PCR negative, and healthy subjects from a single site â€" the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Delhi, India. Furthermore, this is a continuation of an ongoing study. We have already submitted a manuscript showing structural abnormalities and gray matter volume correlates of self-reported fatigue among this group of COVID survivors.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35132408 PMCID: PMC8820653 DOI: 10.1101/2022.02.01.478677
Source DB: PubMed Journal: bioRxiv
Figure 1.Twenty-two Resting State Networks (RSNs) identified from group ICA using ‘melodic’.
Abbreviated names of each network are shown at the bottom of each image. Three orthogonal slices are shown for each network along with a volume rendered image to show depth and three-dimensional view of the RSNs. Statistical estimates (Z-scores) are embedded into a colorbar at the bottom-right. PMV = Primary Visual Network, LV = Lateral Visual, OCP = Occipital Pole, MV = Medial Visual, PRN = Precuneus Network, DAN = Dorsal Attention, VDMN = Ventral Default Mode Network (DMN), PDMN = Posterior DMN, RFP = Right Fronto Parietal, LFP = Left Fronto Parietal, AUD = Auditory, TPJN = Temporo-Parietal Junction Network, LANG = Language Network, EXEC = Executive Control Network, INS = Insular Network, MSMN = Medial Sensory-Motor Network (SMN), VSMN = Ventral SMN, SSNR = Somatosensory Network - Right, SMNL = Somatosensory Network - Left, , BGN = Basal Ganglia Network, SCRB = Superior Cerebellar Network, PCRB = Posterior Cerebellar Network.
Figure 2.ΔFC | Functional Connectivity differences between COVID survivors and healthy controls.
[top row] (A) COVID > HC: Enhanced FC in COVID compared to HCs observed in the Basal Ganglia Network (BGN) network. Three orthogonal slices (left) along with a cut-to-depth volume rendered image to show the effects in the right Calc, Cu and LiG. The colorbar represents t – score values. Cluster information include - cluster peak: [9 −84 6], | cluster extent threshold, k = 69 | cluster size = 69 voxels. (B) COVID > HC: Enhanced FC in COVID compared to HCs observed in the Precuneus (PRC) network, demonstrating a significant difference in FC in the bilateral SPL and PCu regions. Cluster information include - cluster peak: [21 −57 54], | cluster extent threshold, k = 90 | cluster size = 90 voxels. (C) HC > COVID: Enhanced FC in HCs compared to COVID observed in the Language (LANG) network demonstrating significant difference in several vermal layers of the Cerebellum. Cluster information include - cluster peak: [9 −63 −24], | cluster extent threshold, k = 57 | cluster size = 57 voxels. [bottom row] Corresponding group level ICA networks from which FC differences are shown on the top row. The colorbar represents z-scores.
Figure 3.FC corr. Fatigue | COVID: Negative correlation of FC with self-reported fatigue scores in COVID individuals.
(left) For the PRN network, three orthogonal slices (left) along with a cut-to-depth volume rendered image showing regions from the Superior Parietal and Occipital Gyri that demonstrated significantly negative correlation with fatigue. The colorbar represents t-score values. (right) The graph shows the linear relationship of the average FC within the significant cluster and self-reported fatigue scores from COVID individuals. The x-axis represents the average FC (z-scores) from the cluster and the y-axis represents the fatigue scores. The shaded gray area represents the 95% confidence interval. The red line represents the least squares regression line of best fit. Cluster information include - cluster peak: [−21 −75 36], | cluster extent threshold, k = 58 and cluster size = 58 voxels.
List of spatial regions from significant clusters obtained from the contrast – COVID > HC.
| ΔFC | RSN Name | Cl. No. | Anatomical Locations | Cl. Ext. | Cl. Size | Peak MNI Coordinates | Peak T, pFWE Values | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X | Y | Z | |||||||
| COVID > HC |
| 1 |
| 69 | 69 | 9 | −84 | 6 | 4.46, 0.004 |
|
| |||||||||
|
| |||||||||
|
| 1 |
| 90 | 90 | 21 | −57 | 54 | 4.22, 0.001 | |
|
| |||||||||
|
| |||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| HC > COVID |
| 1 |
| 57 | 57 | 9 | −63 | −24 | 3.56, 0.019 |
|
| |||||||||
|
| |||||||||
The regions from three RSNs – BGN, PRN and LANG which demonstrated significant differences are presented with peak MNI coordinates (X Y Z) and corresponding peak t-score values for each cluster. Keys – ΔFC = Direction of change in Functional Connectivity; Cl. = Cluster; Cl. No. = Cluster Number; Cl. Ext. = Cluster Extent Threshold; Cl. Size = Cluster Size; T = peak t-score; pFWE = corrected p-value.
List of spatial regions from clusters showing significant correlation with self-reported fatigue among COVID individuals.
| Corr (FC, ftg.) | RSN Name | Cl. No. | Anatomical Locations | Cl. Ext. | Cl. Size | Peak MNI Coordinates | Peak T, pFWE Values | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X | Y | Z | |||||||
| COVID |
| 1 |
| 58 | 58 | −21 | −75 | 36 | 5.31, 0.01 |
|
| |||||||||
|
| |||||||||
|
| |||||||||
The regions from PRN which demonstrated significant correlation are presented with peak MNI coordinates (X Y Z) and corresponding peak t-score values for each cluster. Keys – FC = Functional Connectivity; ftg. = Fatigue Scores, Cl. = Cluster; Cl. No. = Cluster Number; Cl. Ext. = Cluster Extent Threshold; Cl. Size = Cluster Size; T = peak t-score; pFWE = corrected p-value.