No abstract

No abstract

Background: Tractography has become a standard technique for planning neurosurgical operations in the past decades. This technique relies on diffusion magnetic resonance imaging. The cutoff value for the fractional anisotropy (FA) has an important role in avoiding false-positive and false-negative results. However, there is a wide variation in FA cutoff values. Methods: We analyzed a prospective cohort of 14 patients (six males and eight females, 50.1 ± 4.0 years old) with intracerebral tumors that were mostly gliomas. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was obtained within 7 days before and within 7 days after surgery with T1 and diffusion tensor image (DTI) sequences. We, then, reconstructed the corticospinal tract (CST) in all patients and extracted the FA values within the resulting volume. Results: The mean FA in all CSTs was 0.4406 ± 0.0003 with the fifth percentile at 0.1454. FA values in right-hemispheric CSTs were lower (p < 0.0001). Postoperatively, the FA values were more condensed around their mean (p < 0.0001). The analysis of infiltrated or compressed CSTs revealed a lower fifth percentile (0.1407 ± 0.0109 versus 0.1763 ± 0.0040, p = 0.0036). Conclusion: An FA cutoff value of 0.15 appears to be reasonable for neurosurgical patients and may shorten the tractography workflow. However, infiltrated fiber bundles must trigger vigilance and may require lower cutoffs.

Background: Reduced temporal muscle thickness (TMT) has been discussed as a prognostic marker in IDH-wildtype glioblastoma. This retrospective multicenter study was designed to investigate whether TMT is an independent prognostic marker in newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Methods: TMT was retrospectively measured in 335 patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2019 at the University Hospitals of Leipzig and Rostock. The cohort was dichotomized by TMT and tested for association with overall survival (OS) after 12 months by multivariate proportional hazard calculation. Results: TMT of 7.0 mm or more was associated with increased OS (46.3 ± 3.9% versus 36.6 ± 3.9%, p > 0.001). However, the sub-groups showed significant epidemiological differences. In multivariate proportional hazard calculation, patient age (HR 1.01; p = 0.004), MGMT promoter status (HR 0.76; p = 0.002), EOR (HR 0.61), adjuvant irradiation (HR 0.24) and adjuvant chemotherapy (HR 0.40; all p < 0.001) were independent prognostic markers for OS. However, KPS (HR 1.00, p = 0.31), BMI (HR 0.98, p = 0.11) and TMT (HR 1.06; p = 0.07) were not significantly associated with OS. Conclusion: TMT has not appeared as a statistically independent prognostic marker in this cohort of patients with newly diagnosed IDH-wildtype glioblastoma.

This study aimed to re-evaluate the possible differences between attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) subjects and healthy controls in the context of a standard Go/NoGo task (visual continuous performance test [VCPT]), frequently used to measure executive functions. In contrast to many previous studies, our sample comprises children, adolescents, and adults. We analyzed data from 447 ADHD patients and 227 healthy controls. By applying multivariate linear regression analyses, we controlled the group differences between ADHD patients and controls for age and sex. As dependent variables we used behavioral (number of omission and commission errors, reaction time, and reaction time variability) and neurophysiological measures (event-related potentials [ERPs]). In summary, we successfully replicated the deviations of ADHD subjects from healthy controls. The differences are small to moderate when expressed as effect size measures (number of omission errors: d = 0.60, reaction time variability: d = 0.56, contingent negative variation (CNV) and P3 amplitudes: −0.35 <  d < −0.47, ERP latencies: 0.21 <  d < 0.29). Further analyses revealed no substantial differences between ADHD subtypes (combined, inattentive, and hyperactive/impulsive presentation), subgroups according to high- and low-symptomatic burden or methylphenidate intake for their daily routine. We successfully replicated known differences between ADHD subjects and controls for the behavioral and neurophysiological variables. However, the small-to-moderate effect sizes limit their utility as biomarkers in the diagnostic procedure. The incongruence of self-reported symptomatic burden and clinical diagnosis emphasizes the challenges of the present clinical diagnosis with low reliability, which partially accounts for the low degree of discrimination between ADHD subjects and controls.