2021
DOI: 10.3171/2020.2.jns192994
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Altered corticospinal microstructure and motor cortex excitability in gliomas: an advanced tractography and transcranial magnetic stimulation study

Abstract: OBJECTIVEThis prospective case-control study was conducted to examine whether spherical deconvolution (SD) can unveil microstructural abnormalities in the corticospinal tract (CST) caused by IDH-mutant gliomas. To determine the significance of abnormal microstructure, the authors investigated the correlation between diffusion parameters and neurophysiological data collected with navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation (nTMS).METHODSTwenty participants (10 patients and 10 healthy controls) were recruited. D… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
10
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

4
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
1
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This multi-modal brain mapping approach is able to reveal variation but also ‘atypical cases’, meaning the patients that do not fit expected assumptions of associations between brain areas or connections and deficit in certain cognitive domains. In the surgical setting, transcranial magnetic stimulation for presurgical planning (e.g., Giampiccolo et al 2020 ; Mirchandani et al 2020 ), deep brain stimulation (e.g., Calabrese 2016 ; Akram et al 2017 ), and direct electrical cortical stimulation during awake surgery (e.g., Puglisi et al 2019 ; Middlebrooks et al 2020 ) have been aided by the consideration of inter-individual variability in white matter tracts estimated with tractography. However, there has not yet been a systematic attempt to capture this variability in connections across the entire brain and associate white matter phenotypes with cognitive profiles and clinical dimensions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This multi-modal brain mapping approach is able to reveal variation but also ‘atypical cases’, meaning the patients that do not fit expected assumptions of associations between brain areas or connections and deficit in certain cognitive domains. In the surgical setting, transcranial magnetic stimulation for presurgical planning (e.g., Giampiccolo et al 2020 ; Mirchandani et al 2020 ), deep brain stimulation (e.g., Calabrese 2016 ; Akram et al 2017 ), and direct electrical cortical stimulation during awake surgery (e.g., Puglisi et al 2019 ; Middlebrooks et al 2020 ) have been aided by the consideration of inter-individual variability in white matter tracts estimated with tractography. However, there has not yet been a systematic attempt to capture this variability in connections across the entire brain and associate white matter phenotypes with cognitive profiles and clinical dimensions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Preoperative and intraoperative functional mapping has been widely described in resection surgery of infiltrative gliomas to preserve functional integrity and this has shown to improve long-term outcomes [ 10–14 ]. In this case, the preoperative nTMS documented a functional impairment of the primary motor cortex and CST and tractography revealed altered white matter microstructure of the CST [ 15 ]. This information was important as it indicated an injured motor pathway more susceptible to non-reversible injury [ 16 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While corticospinal conduction varies physiologically due to fluctuations of cortical (Khademi, Royter, & Gharabaghi, 2018; Naros, Lehnertz, Leão, Ziemann, & Gharabaghi, 2020) and spinal excitability (van Elswijk et al, 2010; Naros et al, 2020), lesions within the corticospinal system (e.g., brain tumors) can cause additional impairment of CSV transmission (Cirillo, Calabro, & Perez, 2016; Hallett, 2000; Kobayashi & Pascual‐Leone, 2003; Stinear et al, 2007). However, conventional MEP characteristics (i.e., latency and amplitude) are often ambiguous, resulting in an inconsistency between clinical (e.g., motor impairment) and electrophysiological findings (Machetanz et al, 2021; Mirchandani et al, 2020; Picht et al, 2012; Sollmann et al, 2017). Conversely, there is only limited data relating the temporal precision of CSV to the actual motor performance (Machetanz, Gallotti, et al, 2021; Machetanz et al, 2021).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%