| Literature DB >> 36203973 |
Duohao Wang1, Qun Yao1, Xingjian Lin1, Jun Hu2, Jingping Shi1.
Abstract
Purpose: To explore changes in the brain structural network in patients with cerebellar infarction on different sides and their correlations with changes in cognitive function.Entities:
Keywords: brain network; cerebellar infarction; cognitive impairment; diffusion tensor imaging; graph theory
Year: 2022 PMID: 36203973 PMCID: PMC9530262 DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2022.982630
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurol ISSN: 1664-2295 Impact factor: 4.086
Demographic and clinical characteristics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (year) | 62.63 ± 7.30 | 59.78 ± 4.31 | 61.26 ± 4.73 | 1.24 | 0.29 |
| Sex (M/F) | 11/8 | 10/8 | 17/10 | 0.27 | 0.87 |
| Education (year) | 8.16 ± 1.71 | 7.83 ± 0.99 | 8.41 ± 1.22 | 1.01 | 0.37 |
| MMSE | 26.68 ± 2.33 | 26.44 ± 1.89 | 27.81 ± 1.00 | 4.09 | 0.02 |
| MOCA | 22.37 ± 2.22 | 22.89 ± 2.76 | 27.04 ± 1.13 | 37.26 | <0.001 |
| RAVLT-A | 21.16 ± 3.83 | 21.56 ± 3.26 | 23.78 ± 2.74 | 4.45 | 0.016 |
| RAVLT-B | 2.84 ± 1.34 | 3.0 ± 0.97 | 4.81 ± 1.0 | 23.03 | <0.001 |
| DST | 10.68 ± 2.47 | 11.67 ± 2.45 | 12.44 ± 2.03 | 3.31 | 0.04 |
| BNT | 24.74 ± 2.51 | 24.89 ± 3.10 | 26.19 ± 2.02 | 2.36 | 0.13 |
| TMT-A | 104.32 ± 46.06 | 104.56 ± 27.71 | 65.52 ± 12.66 | 13.01 | <0.001 |
| TMT-B | 222.63 ± 37.09 | 257.72 ± 68.58 | 165.29 ± 50.39 | 17.47 | <0.001 |
| HAMD | 0.15 ± 0.50 | 0.22 ± 0.43 | 0.00 ± 0.00 | 2.38 | 0.101 |
| CDT | 3.84 ± 1.01 | 4.11 ± 0.90 | 4.48 ± 0.75 | 3.05 | 0.055 |
Values are represented as the mean ± SD;
p-value for the sex distribution in the three groups was obtained using a χ2 test; other comparisons used the one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA); p < 0.05 was considered significant.
Post hoc paired comparisons showed significant group differences between control subjects and patients with left cerebellar infarction.
Post hoc paired comparisons showed significant group differences between control subjects and patients with right cerebellar infarction.
Post hoc paired comparisons showed significant group differences between patients with left and right cerebellar infarction. MMSE, mini-mental state examination; MOCA, montreal cognitive scale; RAVLT, rey auditory verbal learning test; DST, digit span test; BNT, boston naming test; TMT, trail-making test; HAMD, Hamilton depression scale; CDT, clock drawing test.
Figure 1Significantly different network properties between patients with left cerebellar infarction, patients with right cerebellar infarction, and healthy controls. Bars and error bars indicate the means and standard deviations. The asterisk marks indicate significant differences between groups (p < 0.05). LCI, left cerebellar infarction; RCI, right cerebellar infarction.
Figure 2Comparison of nodal efficiency between the left cerebellar infarction group and the healthy control group; 12 brain regions with significant differences (p < 0.05, corrected for false discovery rate) between the two groups are shown in red. Node size represents the significance of group differences in nodal efficiency. PCUN, precuneus; DCG, median cingulate and paracingulate gyri; TPOmid, temporal pole, middle temporal gyrus; PUT, lenticular nucleus, putamen; REC, gyrus rectus; CUN, cuneus; ANG, angular gyrus; PCG, posterior cingulate gyrus; L, left; R, right.
Figure 3Comparison of nodal efficiency between the right cerebellar infarction group and the healthy control group; 13 brain regions with significant differences (p < 0.05, corrected for false discovery rate) between the two groups are shown in blue. Node size represents the significance of group differences in nodal efficiency. PCUN, precuneus; DCG, median cingulate and paracingulate gyri; TPOmid, temporal pole, middle temporal gyrus; PUT, lenticular nucleus, putamen; REC, gyrus rectus; CUN, cuneus. ANG, angular gyrus; PCG, posterior cingulate gyrus; L, left; R, right.
Brain regions with significant differences in nodal efficiency among the patients with left cerebellar infarction, patients with right cerebellar infarction and control subjects.
|
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |||
| PCUN.R | 10.68 | <0.001 | −3.27 (0.002) | −3.78 (<0.001) | ND |
| DCG.R | 10.62 | <0.001 | −3.22 (0.001) | −4.10 (<0.001) | ND |
| DCG.L | 9.64 | <0.001 | −2.84 (0.003) | −4.02 (<0.001) | ND |
| TPOmid.L | 8.898 | <0.001 | −3.54 (0.001) | −3.14 (0.001) | ND |
| TPOsup.L | 8.25 | 0.001 | −3.40 (0.001) | −2.96 (0.002) | ND |
| PUT.L | 7.84 | 0.001 | ND | −4.13 (<0.001) | ND |
| PCUN.L | 7.56 | 0.001 | −3.08 (0.002) | −3.18 (0.001) | ND |
| REC.L | 7.48 | 0.001 | −2.53 (0.014) | −3.96 (<0.001) | ND |
| CUN.R | 7.18 | 0.002 | −2.84 (0.014) | −3.34 (0.001) | ND |
| PUT.R | 7.04 | 0.002 | −2.48 (0.025) | −3.55 (0.001) | ND |
| ANG.R | 5.85 | 0.005 | −2.61 (0.022) | −2.98 (0.002) | ND |
| REC.R | 5.70 | 0.005 | −2.07 (0.033) | −3.21 (0.002) | ND |
| PCG.L | 5.37 | 0.007 | −2.45 (0.011) | −2.92 (0.006) | ND |
Comparisons of regional efficiencies were performed between LCI, RCI, and healthy controls using one-way ANOVA. Post hoc pairwise comparisons were then performed using t-tests. For ANOVA, P < 0.05 (false discovery rate corrected) was considered a significant difference. For post hoc tests, the LSD test and P < 0.05 indicated a significant difference. ND, no significant difference; PCUN, precuneus; DCG, median cingulate and paracingulate gyri; TPOmid, temporal pole, middle temporal gyrus; PUT, lenticular nucleus, putamen; REC, gyrus rectus; CUN, cuneus; ANG, angular gyrus; PCG, posterior cingulate gyrus; L, left; R, right.
Figure 4Correlations between network parameter values and neuropsychological scores in patients with left cerebellar infarction. (A) Eg values were positively correlated with MMSE scores. (B) Eg values and regional efficiency of the DCG.R were positively correlated with DST scores.
Figure 5Correlations between network parameter values and neuropsychological scores in patients with right cerebellar infarction. (A) Lp values were negatively correlated with MMSE scores, and Eg values were positively correlated with MMSE scores. (B) Eg values were positively correlated with RAVLT-A scores. (C) El values and regional efficiency of the PCUN.L were negatively correlated with TMT-B scores.