Resting-state functional-MRI in iNPH: can default mode and motor networks changes improve patient selection and outcome? Preliminary report.
CSF dynamics
Default-mode network
Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus
Motor network
Resting-state functional-MRI
Tap test
Ventriculoperitoneal shunt
Journal
Fluids and barriers of the CNS
ISSN: 2045-8118
Titre abrégé: Fluids Barriers CNS
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101553157
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
26 Jan 2023
26 Jan 2023
Historique:
received:
16
09
2022
accepted:
16
01
2023
entrez:
26
1
2023
pubmed:
27
1
2023
medline:
31
1
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH) is a progressive and partially reversible form of dementia, characterized by impaired interactions between multiple brain regions. Because of the presence of comorbidities and a lack of accurate diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers, only a minority of patients receives disease-specific treatment. Recently, resting-state functional-magnetic resonance imaging (rs-fMRI) has demonstrated functional connectivity alterations in inter-hemispheric, frontal, occipital, default-mode (DMN) and motor network (MN) circuits. Herein, we report our experience in a cohort of iNPH patients that underwent cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) dynamics evaluation and rs-fMRI. The study aimed to identify functional circuits related to iNPH and explore the relationship between DMN and MN recordings and clinical modifications before and after infusion and tap test, trying to understand iNPH pathophysiology and to predict the best responders to ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS) implant. We prospectively collected data regarding clinical assessment, neuroradiological findings, lumbar infusion and tap test of thirty-two iNPH patients who underwent VPS implant. Rs-fMRI was performed using MELODIC-ICA both before and after the tap test. Rs-fMRI data of thirty healthy subjects were also recorded. At the baseline, reduced z-DMN and z-MN scores were recorded in the iNPH cohort compared with controls. Higher z-scores were recorded in more impaired patients. Both z-scores significantly improved after the tap test except in subjects with a low resistance to outflow value and without a significant clinical improvement after the test. A statistically significant difference in mean MN connectivity scores for tap test responders and non-responders was demonstrated both before (p = 0.0236) and after the test (p = 0.00137). A statistically significant main effect of the tap test on DMN connectivity after CSF subtraction was recorded (p = 0.038). Our results suggest the presence of a partially reversible plasticity functional mechanism in DMN and MN. Low values compensate for the initial stages of the disease, while higher values of z-DMN were recorded in older patients with a longer duration of symptoms, suggesting an exhausted plasticity compensation. The standardization of this technique could play a role as a non-invasive biomarker in iNPH disease, suggesting the right time for surgery. Trial Registration Prot. IRB 090/2021.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH) is a progressive and partially reversible form of dementia, characterized by impaired interactions between multiple brain regions. Because of the presence of comorbidities and a lack of accurate diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers, only a minority of patients receives disease-specific treatment. Recently, resting-state functional-magnetic resonance imaging (rs-fMRI) has demonstrated functional connectivity alterations in inter-hemispheric, frontal, occipital, default-mode (DMN) and motor network (MN) circuits. Herein, we report our experience in a cohort of iNPH patients that underwent cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) dynamics evaluation and rs-fMRI. The study aimed to identify functional circuits related to iNPH and explore the relationship between DMN and MN recordings and clinical modifications before and after infusion and tap test, trying to understand iNPH pathophysiology and to predict the best responders to ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS) implant.
METHODS
METHODS
We prospectively collected data regarding clinical assessment, neuroradiological findings, lumbar infusion and tap test of thirty-two iNPH patients who underwent VPS implant. Rs-fMRI was performed using MELODIC-ICA both before and after the tap test. Rs-fMRI data of thirty healthy subjects were also recorded.
RESULTS
RESULTS
At the baseline, reduced z-DMN and z-MN scores were recorded in the iNPH cohort compared with controls. Higher z-scores were recorded in more impaired patients. Both z-scores significantly improved after the tap test except in subjects with a low resistance to outflow value and without a significant clinical improvement after the test. A statistically significant difference in mean MN connectivity scores for tap test responders and non-responders was demonstrated both before (p = 0.0236) and after the test (p = 0.00137). A statistically significant main effect of the tap test on DMN connectivity after CSF subtraction was recorded (p = 0.038).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Our results suggest the presence of a partially reversible plasticity functional mechanism in DMN and MN. Low values compensate for the initial stages of the disease, while higher values of z-DMN were recorded in older patients with a longer duration of symptoms, suggesting an exhausted plasticity compensation. The standardization of this technique could play a role as a non-invasive biomarker in iNPH disease, suggesting the right time for surgery. Trial Registration Prot. IRB 090/2021.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36703181
doi: 10.1186/s12987-023-00407-6
pii: 10.1186/s12987-023-00407-6
pmc: PMC9878781
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
7Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2008;25(1):37-45
pubmed: 18025828
Neurology. 2011 Sep 20;77(12):1119-25
pubmed: 21849644
J Neurol. 2020 May;267(5):1389-1400
pubmed: 31997040
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2020 May;112:452-471
pubmed: 32088348
Neurology. 2015 Dec 8;85(23):2063-71
pubmed: 26644048
Am J Surg. 2019 Aug;218(2):393-400
pubmed: 30509455
Neurourol Urodyn. 2012 Jan;31(1):50-5
pubmed: 22038765
Dement Neuropsychol. 2019 Apr-Jun;13(2):133-143
pubmed: 31285787
Mov Disord Clin Pract. 2016 Feb 18;3(4):331-341
pubmed: 30363503
Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2020;49(3):255-263
pubmed: 32814322
Aging Dis. 2020 Oct 1;11(5):1276-1290
pubmed: 33014537
Eur Neuropsychopharmacol. 2010 Aug;20(8):519-34
pubmed: 20471808
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2013 May;84(5):562-8
pubmed: 23250963
Hum Brain Mapp. 2021 Apr 1;42(5):1485-1502
pubmed: 33296129
IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2004 Feb;23(2):137-52
pubmed: 14964560
Neuroimage. 2017 Jul 1;154:188-205
pubmed: 27989777
World Neurosurg. 2020 May;137:429-434.e13
pubmed: 32059972
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2014 Jul;85(7):806-10
pubmed: 24292998
Hum Brain Mapp. 2014 Jan;35(1):161-72
pubmed: 22987670
J Neurosurg. 2016 Feb;124(2):382-8
pubmed: 26339853
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001 Jan 16;98(2):676-82
pubmed: 11209064
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Jul 5;102(27):9673-8
pubmed: 15976020
Neuroimage. 2017 Jul 1;154:169-173
pubmed: 27888059
Brain. 2008 Nov;131(Pt 11):2904-12
pubmed: 18931387
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Sep 12;103(37):13848-53
pubmed: 16945915
J Neurosurg. 2018 Nov 1;:1-13
pubmed: 30497150
Annu Rev Neurosci. 2015 Jul 8;38:433-47
pubmed: 25938726
J Neurosurg. 2016 Feb;124(2):350-8
pubmed: 26295919
Front Syst Neurosci. 2010 Aug 26;4:
pubmed: 20953235
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2013 Oct;155(10):1977-80
pubmed: 23975646
Neurology. 2014 Apr 22;82(16):1449-54
pubmed: 24682964
Front Neurosci. 2017 Sep 01;11:470
pubmed: 28919849
Acta Neurol Scand. 2012 Sep;126(3):145-53
pubmed: 22571428
Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo). 2021 Feb 15;61(2):63-97
pubmed: 33455998
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2016 Dec;158(12):2311-2319
pubmed: 27743250
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Jan 7;100(1):253-8
pubmed: 12506194
World Neurosurg. 2015 Dec;84(6):2002-9
pubmed: 26183137
Neuroimage Clin. 2018 Mar 16;18:849-870
pubmed: 29876270
Neurosurgery. 2005 Sep;57(3 Suppl):S17-28; discussion ii-v
pubmed: 16160426